Search for: "MATTER OF RULES OF EVIDENCE" Results 7101 - 7120 of 41,833
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 May 2014, 10:18 am by Stephen Bilkis
While disc herniation and limited range of motion based on objective findings may constitute evidence of serious injury, the orthopedic doctor does not comment on the findings and does not rule out whether the injuries were causally related to the accident. [read post]
This professed neutrality yet obvious policy preference is evident with respect to each element of the new disclosure. [read post]
14 Oct 2014, 12:59 pm
Nevertheless, pursuant to Rule 201(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, we may take judicial notice of the fact that a filing was made before the PTAB. [read post]
24 Aug 2015, 5:00 am
  We love it.Since the Supreme Court never bothered to define “clear evidence” in Levine, the rulings in Rheinfrank and Depakoteprovide another fact pattern against which courts can judge post-Levinepreemption.These cases also disposed of several legal arguments against preemption. [read post]
3 Apr 2018, 7:15 am by Brian Cordery
Brian Cordery and Rachel MumbyWise readers will know that when it comes to matters of the heart, it is often best not to interfere. [read post]
5 Jul 2017, 3:44 am
Does the ruling mean that Courts is therefore liable for infringement of the “BIG BOX” mark? [read post]
25 Jul 2016, 9:03 am by Susan Hennessey
There is no exclusionary rule regarding media coverage of leaked or stolen information. [read post]
20 Jul 2009, 4:58 am
Spoliation Results In The Shifting Of The Expense Of Class Notice In a third ruling in the case, Judge Jolly ruled that the Defendants had spoliated evidence by destroying "cover sheets" which might have shown whether Defendants had falsely reported a down payment. [read post]
30 Apr 2009, 10:03 am
Time, once again, to remind the law students and fledgling lawyers out there not to practice law this way : (a) it is not recommended practice to tell a judge that she should accelerate the hearing date she set for decision of a number of motions, all involving voluminous paperwork, (b) there is no basis in the law for making a motion to compel a deposition without revealing the identify of the witness, the subject matter, etc., (c) it is inappropriate to attempt to submit as "new… [read post]
9 May 2015, 12:22 pm by Jeffrey P. Gale, P.A.
However, a party’s own rules made to govern the conduct of employees are relevant evidence of the standard of care but the jury receiving such evidence must be cautioned that the existence of an internal rule does not itself fix the standard of care Steinberg v. [read post]
1 Oct 2007, 2:55 am
Supporters of the proposal framed the issue as a matter of client protection, while opponents such as Dutton pointed to the lack of empirical evidence supporting a need for the proposal. [read post]
3 Jan 2012, 3:54 am by Ben Vernia
After prevailing at trial the men sought attorney’s fees under EAJA, and sanctions under Rule 37 for the government’s failure to admit certain facts as requested under Rule 36. [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 8:00 am
Essentially, if the content of the Miranda rights is intact, the form does not matter in the eyes of the law. [read post]
4 May 2017, 2:47 pm
American courts adopted the Mansfield rule as a matter of common law, though not in every detail. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 4:00 am by Alan Macek
Factors considered include: the issues are well defined; the facts necessary to resolve the issues are clearly set out in the evidence; the evidence is not controversial and there are no issues as to credibility; and the questions of law, though novel, can be dealt with as easily now as they would otherwise have been after a full trial; the amount involved and the cost of taking the case forward to a conventional trial in relation to the amount involved; the complexity of the… [read post]
17 Jan 2012, 6:45 am
Yet, the trial court "ruled on the motion for new trial without reference to the affidavit, choosing to rely instead on the fact that plaintiffs failed to take advantage of their one opportunity to present evidence. [read post]