Search for: "Pro Se Department"
Results 61 - 80
of 945
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Mar 2023, 7:58 am
(Sept. 26, 2022) Law Student and PILS Fellow Morgan Kaplan Describes the “Steps” Required of a Pro Se “Movant” in Family Court in Milwaukee County (Oct. 3, 2022) The Mobile Legal Clinic Speeds Forward (Oct. 10, 2022) The Marquette Volunteer Legal Clinic(s)—A True Legal Community Effort (Oct. 17, 2022) Reaching Rural Areas with Our Pro Bono Efforts (Oct. 24, 2022) Of Bankruptcy, Legal Action, and Marquette Law School’s Many Partners in… [read post]
22 Jun 2007, 9:31 am
Yesterday the First Department reversed a conviction of robbery in the first degree of a defendant who wanted to proceed pro se, although during the trial court's inquiry, the defendant revealed that he had problems with memory (People v Anderson, 2007 NY Slip Op 05414). [read post]
9 Jun 2016, 4:00 am
Mary's County Department of Social Services, 2016 U.S. [read post]
31 Dec 2007, 4:48 am
Although the court recognized that plaintiff was proceeding pro se after trial, it properly observed that she still was obliged to comply with court orders and not make baseless accusations regarding the court's integrity. [read post]
19 May 2009, 2:51 am
What could The Hartford legal department improve on? [read post]
29 Sep 2017, 12:21 pm
Pro se litigants, however, are not exempt from the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. [read post]
6 Dec 2021, 12:49 pm
The lawsuit was brought against DHS in 2017 as a pro se case (without lawyers) by Ms. [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 5:28 pm
Both counsel and the defendant, pro se, submitted briefs followed by the People's opposition brief. [read post]
29 Dec 2010, 3:03 am
In Perez-Faringer v Heilman ; 2010 NY Slip Op 09238 ; Decided on December 14, 2010 ; Appellate Division, Second Department plaintiff, pro-se in the action below, and in the appeal, has had the action dismissed, for the mere and easily avoidable failure to serve a complaint after demand. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 2:54 am
In Perez-Faringer v Heilman ; 2010 NY Slip Op 09238 ; Decided on December 14, 2010 ; Appellate Division, Second Department plaintiff, pro-se in the action below, and in the appeal, has had the action dismissed, for the mere and easily avoidable failure to serve a complaint after demand. [read post]
13 Jun 2010, 6:15 am
Pro se plaintiff did not state a claim against any person who used excessive force during the raid on his property, so the complaint is dismissed as the police department. [read post]
7 Mar 2022, 2:00 am
It’s unclear whether courts will apply (1) a strict rule of per se illegality or (2) a rule of reason. [read post]
29 Oct 2020, 11:29 am
I did pro bono work with various organizations while in law school but the bulk of my work was with the Tarrant County Bar Association, or TCBA, and the Immigration Legal Services department of Catholic Charities Dallas, or CCD. [read post]
31 Oct 2008, 11:01 pm
I've read these types of articles before, which usually focus on the pros and cons of the positions and other likely fodder. [read post]
20 Aug 2008, 5:00 am
Evening Court is a unique opportunity for indigent litigants (working with a pro bono attorney or representing themselves pro se) to get before the court and finalize their divorce case. [read post]
4 Feb 2020, 5:30 am
Turney, LLC 2019 NY Slip Op 03917 [172 AD3d 553] May 21, 2019 Appellate Division, First Department is defended pro-se. [read post]
21 Mar 2018, 4:19 am
Genet v Buzin 2018 NY Slip Op 01878 Decided on March 20, 2018 Appellate Division, First Department is an example of a pro-se legal malpractice case wiped off the board. [read post]
24 Oct 2022, 3:29 am
“And plaintiff-appellant having moved, pro se, to suppress allegedly improperly obtained privileged information of psychotherapy notes from Dr. [read post]
6 Feb 2020, 4:20 am
Plaintiff pro-se might have settled the case and then discontinued, or he might have discontinued in mere pique. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 3:26 am
Here in this case, we have a pro-se plaintiff pursuing a pro-se defendant, over a case which was lost prior to plaintiff's retention of defendant in the underlying action. [read post]
