High School Mock Trial 2015 Emerson Jones v. Buckeye Juvenile Correctional Institute Errata Sheet 10/14/14

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "High School Mock Trial 2015 Emerson Jones v. Buckeye Juvenile Correctional Institute Errata Sheet 10/14/14"

Transcription

1 High School Mock Trial 2015 Emerson Jones v. Buckeye Juvenile Correctional Institute Errata Sheet 10/14/14 1) What is the burden of proof of this year s case? Emerson Jones v. Buckeye Juvenile Correctional Institute is a civil case, and so the burden of proof is preponderance of the evidence. 2) There are two different versions of page 41 of the case file, Special Instructions. Which is correct? The version of page 41 that includes 5 special instructions (as opposed to 3), is the correct version. The correct version reads as follows: Special Instructions 1. All rules included in the Simplified Ohio Rules of Evidence in the case materials will apply. 2. Exhibit C Map of Buckeye Juvenile Correctional Institution is not drawn to scale. 3. The Ohio Administrative Code regarding the use of force in the Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections is attached to this case file. The parties agree this governs the Ohio Youth Services Correctional Facilities. 4. For the purposes of this mock trial simulation, it is stipulated that the state of Ohio has waived their sovereign immunity and consents to suit. 5. This trial is focused exclusively on the 8th Amendment issues; it is not intended to address 11th Amendment immunity, 42 U.S.C. 1983, or issues of scope of employment. 3) The date on Exhibit D is July Was this exhibit, a memo on use of force by correctional officers, released before or after the central incident to the case, the food fight? For purposes of the case, the memo was distributed before the food fight incident. Assume that the correctional officers knew and understood its contents prior to reacting to the food fight. 4) One of the cases included, Greeno v. Daley, is a Seventh Circuit case, while the rest are Supreme Court cases. In the Northern District of Buckeye, is the Greeno case binding or only persuasive legal precedent? The Greeno case itself (and any cited 7 th circuit precedent) should be interpreted as persuasive, not binding. However, where Supreme Court precedent is cited as rule of law, the cited precedent is binding. Note, however, that it is only the cited portion which is material to the case at hand, and teams should not interpret this as a directive to view the cited cases in their entirety.

2 10/28/14 1) Who has the burden of proof in this year s case? The Plaintiff, Emerson Jones, has the burden of proof. 2) There is no medical wing present. Is it missing or not on the map because it does not exist? The medical wing/infirmary is located on the second floor of BJCI, and is therefore not on the map included as an exhibit, which is a map of the first floor of the building. 3) Are there intentionally no doors to the holding cells? Or an exterior door from the kitchen to outside? Please assume that there are doors to the holding cells, but no exterior door from the kitchen to the outside 4) The sample score sheet included the case file notes that a 10 point deduction will be the penalty for a rules violation, but the competition rules say it is a 5 point deduction. Which is correct? The competition rules are correct a 5 point deduction will be the penalty for rules violations. 5) Emerson Jones has stated a desire to play for the Cleveland Cavaliers, however, the gender pronouns for Emerson suggest that Emerson could be either a female or a male. Does Emerson s desire to play for the Cavaliers mean the character is male? Emerson Jones can be a male or a female. Emerson s desire is to play professional basketball, instead of for a particular team. 6) Pages 42 and 53 of the case materials indicate that we are in United States District Court for the Northern District of Buckeye. But page 43 indicates that we are in United States District Court for the Central District of Ohio. Which District Court are we to assume we re in? This case is being heard in the fictional U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Buckeye. 7) There appears to be a discrepancy within the Defense Team in a key fact about this case. Nurse Rodgers (Defense Witness) says in her statement in lines "I reviewed our patient charts, and it does say I examined Mr./Ms. Jones' wrist that day" (i.e., the day of incident in cafeteria). However, the Defense Pre-Trial Brief (In section titled "Plaintiff Receives Appropriate Medical Attention," p. 55)

3 states "Plaintiff did not request further medical treatment at that time, and s/he returned to his/her cell without visiting the infirmary." Which is correct? Replace the word without on page 55 to after. 8) In Emerson Jones statement at lines 50-62, the paragraph implies that his pants were replaced on the day of the food fight ( Well that day, my pants ripped and I needed new pants. ). By contrast, in the statement of Casey Burgundy it states that Jones pants were replaced 2 days before the food fight (lines Two days prior to the fight, Jones tore his BCJI-issued pants. We were running low on clean pants so we had to issue Jones pants that were one size too big. ). Which statement is correct? That these two statements do not agree is neither intentional nor unintentional. Your students may choose to bring this discrepancy up at trial if they feel it serves their side s interest, as both Emerson and BJCI have an interest in the story appearing favorable to their position. 11/11/14 1) Different depositions and Exhibit B disagree on which wrist Emerson Jones broke (e.g. I ve tried shooting with my left hand (36-37) and Jones seemed to favor his/her left wrist ( ) implying that his/her right wrist is injured (36-37) but I ordered x-rays of Mr./Ms. Jones [sic] left wrist (206) and patient presents with complaints of pain in left wrist (Exhibit B) indicating that his/her left wrist was injured. Which is correct? Emerson s left wrist is fractured. Emerson s testimony in lines and Nurse Rodgers s testimony in line 206 is consistent that Emerson s left wrist was injured, and he/she has difficulty both dribbling and shooting with his/her left hand due to the injury. Our use of the word favor is consistent with the common meaning in medical terminology to use gently due to injury. The implication that Emerson s right wrist is injured is erroneous. 2) Is the defendant the jail facility, or is it the individuals? If it s the jail facility, wouldn t it actually be the State of Ohio instead of the facility? Per the special instructions on page 37, special instruction #4 states that it is stipulated that the state of Ohio has waived their sovereign immunity and consents to suit. Furthermore, Buckeye Juvenile Correctional Institution operates on a private contract, so the institution is the facility for the purposes of this case. 3) Emerson Jones claims that (s)he was incarcerated for four years (5) at BJCI, but Casey Burgundy says (s)he was serving an eighteen-month sentence (648). Which is correct? Emerson was incarcerated for four years.

4 4) Emerson Jones claims that (s)he was release one month before [his/her] 21st birthday (15), but Casey Burgundy seems to indicate that BJCI cannot hold inmates until after they are 18 as the juvenile system only has jurisdiction over them until they turn eighteen ( ). Was Jones being held at BJCI under the adult system? No, Emerson was being held at BJCI under the juvenile system. Juvenile jurisdiction refers to adjudication of a case, and Emerson s case was adjudicated in the juvenile system before his/her eighteenth birthday. Individuals can be held in juvenile detention up until the age of 21. 5) When Jamie Lawrence s testimony refers to Emerson Jones s medical records (236), does this mean/include the document marked as Exhibit B? Yes, Emerson s medical records include Exhibits A and B. 6) Did Jones see Dr. Lawrence 3 weeks after the food fight or 3 months after the food fight? Dr. Lawrence saw Emerson three weeks after he/she was injured, per line 198 of Dr. Lawrence s testimony. Emerson s visit to Dr. Lawrence was three months ago from the date that he/she testified, per lines of Dr. Lawrence s testimony. 7) This case takes place in the state of Buckeye, and that was cleared up nicely on the Errata of 10/28/14. However, part of the case materials deal specifically with the state of Ohio (examples include Exhibit D and the Ohio Revised Code). Moreover, the Amendment and case law that we're dealing with obviously apply to the United States. I'm operating on the assumption that the ORC, the US Constitution and the US Supreme Court cases operate on the state of Buckeye. Can it be explicitly stated in the errata that Buckeye is subject to the laws and Constitutions of Ohio and the United States? Yes the state of Buckeye is subject to the laws and Constitutions of Ohio and the United States as provided in the case materials. 8) In response and further questions about the clarification of the change in wording of the defense brief regarding the nurse's testimony, was the x-ray then not taken on the day of the food fight, the first day Emerson was taken to the infirmary? Instead then, are we to interpret that the x-ray was actually taken two to three days after the food fight? That is the implication with the change in the wording of the defense brief and how it affects the interpretation of the nurse's statement, lines Emerson s testimony states that a few days after the fight the pain still had not gone away, so s/he asked to see the doctor. It was at this time that the x-ray took place (lines ). Nurse Rodgers s statement is consistent, when she says that a few days later the Warden let her know Emerson was complaining of pain, so, she examined him ( ) and then when she noticed swelling she took x-rays ( ). 9) For Exhibit B what is the Date? Was Jones s follow-up visit to the infirmary the day after the food fight? The statements simply say a couple of days later. The date of Exhibit B is three days after the food fight.

5 11/25/14 1) Can the copy of a portion of the Ohio Administrative Code be introduced as an exhibit, or is it meant solely for reference during openings and closings? Only the specified exhibits (A, B, C, and D) may be introduced at trial in the interest of fairness and consistency across trials. This is per rule I. D. 13 ( Only exhibits that are part of the case materials may be used as visual aids ). 2) Lawrence s deposition indicates that Exhibit A was taken by him/her, however one of your previous errata question responses (11/11/14, number 5) seems to indicate that Exhibit A was part of Emerson Jones s medical records from the BJCI. Which is correct? Exhibit A, the X-Ray of Emerson s wrist, was taken by Nurse Rodgers at BJCI. 3) The various depositions and Exhibit B disagree on when Mr./Ms. Jones visited the infirmary for the first time: for example, Emerson says that he did not visit the infirmary for a few days (113) and Exhibit B was previously clarified (errata number 9 on 11/11/14) to have been written 3 days after the food fight, but Nurse Rodgers indicates that her patient charts say that [she] examined Mr./Ms. Jones [sic] wrist (546) on the day of the food fight. Which is correct? The timeline of events is as follows: After the food fight, Emerson, along with several other inmates, was taken to the infirmary. All the inmates received medical clearance quickly. After a few (3) days, Emerson kept complaining about his/her wrist, and was taken for further examination, at which point the wrist was X-Rayed. None of the witness statements disagree on this timeline. However, they may portray the character of these events differently 4) Does the plaintiff have to prove both violations of the 8th Amendment? Or just one? Does the defense have to disprove both or just one? (Guard's/Nurse's) The plaintiff must prove both violations of the 8 th Amendment. 5) On P 82, when Blair says "if Emerson has permanent arm damage, it's his/her fault" (Ln ) Blair does know that Emerson was injured in the wrist...so was this a typo? Or does he really think that Emerson had arm damage? This was not a typo Blair was simply using the collective term arm to refer to Emerson s inability to play basketball (Lines ). 6) Other corrections in the errata sheet make it clear that Emerson did in fact go to the infirmary after the fight. However, a large part of Blair's testimony has to do with his belief that Emerson didn't go the doctor ("Emerson didn't even go see the doctor so I don't see how s/he is claiming extreme injury"); does this mean that Blair is just mistaken, or was this written before it was determined that Emerson did go the infirmary? In other words, how are we to deal with this part of his testimony? (Disregard it, call him out for his lack of knowledge, etc.)

6 Blair s testimony is not inconsistent with the timeline referenced in Question 3 above. Emerson went to the infirmary on the day of the fight, was seen by Nurse Rodgers, and was released without treatment. 7) When Doctor Lawrence references exhibit A on line 206, is the x-ray Dr. Lawrence's that he/she had done or is the x-ray the one BJCI performed? (See errata question 2) 8) On lines 182 to 186 of Jamie Lawrence's statement, he refers to Jones' attorney (a prominent personal injury and civil rights attorney in the area). Are we to assume that the student attorneys on the plaintiff side are this person? Or is this attorney a different person? The student attorneys on the plaintiff side may be the prominent personal injury and civil rights attorney if that complements their trial strategy. It is up to them! 12/9/14 1) Could you clarify Errata post #4 from November 25 th that indicates the plaintiff must prove both violations of the 8 th Amendment? If the plaintiff has the burden of proof on both issues, then this is procedurally inaccurate, as in a real action against BJCI, the plaintiff would only have to prove one, not both, violations of his/her rights. While it is correct that in an actual trial, the plaintiff would not need to prove both 8 th Amendment violations, for the sake of fairness and consistency, the plaintiff will need to address both violations. Given that this is a mock trial engaging limited rules of evidence and limited witness testimony, it has already significantly departed in several ways from an actual trial, and also will for the purposes of plaintiff s burden of proof. 2) Some clarification on Question 2 from 11/25 On line 206 of Dr. Lawrence s testimony, it states that Dr. Lawrence ordered an x-ray of Emerson s wrist and cites Exhibit A. Wouldn t that then make Exhibit A an x-ray taken by Dr. Lawrence instead of Nurse Rodgers? The first sentence of Line 206 (Dr. Lawrence s witness statement) should be altered to read I reviewed x-rays of Mr./Ms/ Jones left wrist. With this alteration, it is consistent to read that the x-rays Dr. Lawrence reviewed were those that were taken at BJCI. Nurse Rodgers and Dr. Lawrence therefore looked at the same x-ray (Exhibit A), and Nurse Rodgers concluded it indicated a sprain, while Dr. Lawrence concluded it was a fracture. Dr. Lawrence did a follow up MRI in his/her facility after consulting the x-ray. Please move forward with your theory of the case on these facts. 3) Given the timeline that is posted in Errata Question 3 from 11/25, Exhibit B seems to be contradictory, as it notes that the patient Emerson Jones returned the day after his/her initial visit and that is inconsistent with the timeline. There was a typographical error on Exhibit B it should read Patient returns three days after initial visit instead of Patient returns day after initial visit Please move forward using Exhibit B to say three days.

7 4) Exhibit B uses the pronoun him for Emerson Jones. Is Emerson a male or a female? Emerson, as all of the witnesses in the case, is gender neutral and can be played by a male or a female student. 5) Rule 901 states that an exhibit may not be introduced without evidence to prove that it is what its proponent claims. However, Trial Procedure section I indicates that both parties have already agreed that all exhibits are admissible. What, if anything, must be established before an exhibit can be introduced? It is true that both parties have already agreed that all exhibits are admissible. However, the fact that an exhibit could be admissible does not excuse the requirement to establish a foundation for the exhibit, which is what Rule 901 calls for. If you would like clarification on what this might look like at trial, please ask your legal advisor, or refer to OCLRE s mock trial tutorial video ( and watch from 8:40 to 9:15 to see how evidence is typically introduced. 6) In general, can we assume that witnesses are aware of any errata answers relating to their testimony? In other words, can witnesses include facts from the errata sheet in their testimony on direct and cross examination? Yes, please operate under the assumption that witnesses are aware of errata answers relating to their testimony. Witnesses may include facts from the errata sheet in their testimony on direct and cross examination. 12/23/14 1) When Dr. Lawrence refers to the lack of a follow-up examination, does she mean a follow-up to the treatment or to the initial examination ( )? No elaboration needed. 2) When Emerson (allegedly) went for a saucer of ketchup ( ), was this saucer ceramic or metal or plastic? No elaboration needed. 3) Please clarify Dr. Lawrence s use of Exhibit A, whether or not he took his own X-Ray, and when he received Jones s full medical record. Dr. Lawrence was initially provided only with the X-Ray from BJCI, which he used to determine that an MRI was needed to properly diagnose. Later, when referring to receiving the medical record, his statement makes clear that he received the X-Ray along with Nurse Rodgers notes. No second X-Ray was ever taken.

8 4) Point 5 of the clarifications from 12/9/14 conflicts with p. 35 of the manual. The clarification is now requiring that the witness establish a foundation for admission. However, P. 35 provides Exhibits are generally presented to the court through witness testimony. Specifically for mock trial purposes, all exhibits contained in the case materials have already been stipulated as admissible evidence and may not be altered to give either side an unfair advantage. This means that both sides have agreed that all exhibits are admitted. Therefore, it is not necessary to demonstrate through a witness testimony that an exhibit is authentic, an accurate representation or admissible, nor is it necessary to move the court for the admission of the physical evidence. This question has been referred to the high school mock trial competition committee. An errata will be posted once the answer has been received. 5) Did the nurse make the note on day 3 to encompass both visits or did she make note 1 on the day of the food fight and the follow up note on day 3? No elaboration needed. 6) On page 79, which is the first page of Blair Healy s statement, on line 386 it refers to Healy as Former Inmate Defense. However, in his statement, he is still incarcerated and has an upcoming early release hearing. Is it safe to assume that the word former was put in line 386 as a typo and that he is a current inmate at BJCI? Yes, Blair Healy is still an inmate at BJCI. 7) This case is a trial- but is it a bench trial or a jury trial? Independent of what a trial in a real life setting would or would not include, for the purposes of Ohio Mock Trial, our procedure does not include a jury. 8) Nurse Rogers is a Certified Nurse Practitioner. Under Ohio law, a Certified Nurse Practitioner must have a post graduate degree in nursing (i.e., a Bachelors degree and a Masters degree). Yet, no educational background is stated in the nurse s witness statement. Can we assume that the nurse holds these degrees? Yes while Ohio law does not govern in Buckeye, you may assume that Nurse Rodgers has both a Bachelors degree and a Masters degree. 9) Given the typographical error in Exhibit B mentioned in previous errata, how are students to present a clean and unmarked copy of the exhibit at trial?

9 1/6/15 The exhibit should read Patient returns three days, instead of Patient returns one day. Marked copies, in this instance, are permitted at trial. 10) Could you please confirm the timeline between Emerson Jones' injury and seeing Doctor Lawrence. Was Emerson released from BJCI three weeks after the food fight and then seen by Dr. Lawrence? Or was he seen by the doctor three weeks after being released from BJCI? No elaboration needed. 11) Errata Q2 on 10/28 states that Exhibit C is a map of the first floor of BJCI, and that the medical wing is on the second floor. Which part(s) of the map of the first floor are considered Block C? Are there additional sections of Block C on other floors or not shown on the map? No elaboration needed. 12) We have experienced a wide range of interpretation of the section of Rule 1 on Invention of Facts which states that "On direct examination, a witness is limited to the facts given in his/her own witness statement." Please clarify to what extent immaterial descriptions and details outside a witness's statement may be used in direct examination. We cannot give more specific guidance on this matter, given the wide variation of possible facts at this or any future trials. 1) On page 42 of the case, the Judge s Order says that trial is scheduled for January 31 st. Should it be January 30 th? Yes, please note that the date should be the state of the District Competition, which is January 30 th, ) The errata states that the left wrist was injured, but Jones's statement says that they 'tried shooting with their left wrist, but even that was painful' implying that their right hand is dominant and was injured. Which wrist is dominant? See Errata from 11/11/14 *Please see the next page for a clean, unmarked copy of Exhibit B that is updated per the Errata postings

10 EXHIBIT B BUCKEYE JUVENILE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE INFIRMARY Patient: E. Jones Treating Physician: R. Rodgers, R.N. Initial Note: Patient presents with complaints of pain in left wrist following physical altercation. Physical exam reveals no sign of injury. Patient released to general population without treatment. Follow-up Note: Patient returns three days after initial visit complaining of wrist pain that prevented him/her from sleeping. Requests pain medication. Limited range of motion and mild swelling noted. Ordered x-ray. X-ray rules out fracture. Anomaly noted in area of scaphoid bone, and physical exam suggests probable sprain. Patient provided with sling for immobilization. Recommended ice, rest, and follow-up with family doctor upon release from BJCI.

High School Mock Trial 2015 Emerson Jones v. Buckeye Juvenile Correctional Institute Errata Sheet 10/14/14

High School Mock Trial 2015 Emerson Jones v. Buckeye Juvenile Correctional Institute Errata Sheet 10/14/14 High School Mock Trial 2015 Emerson Jones v. Buckeye Juvenile Correctional Institute Errata Sheet 10/14/14 1) What is the burden of proof of this year s case? Emerson Jones v. Buckeye Juvenile Correctional

More information

Plaintiff : CASE NO Judge Joseph T. Clark v. : Magistrate Anderson M. Renick

Plaintiff : CASE NO Judge Joseph T. Clark v. : Magistrate Anderson M. Renick [Cite as Pond v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. & Corr., 2006-Ohio-622.] IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO www.cco.state.oh.us ROBERT POND : Plaintiff : CASE NO. 2004-05686 Judge Joseph T. Clark v. : Magistrate Anderson

More information

2014 Law Student Trial Competition Questions and Answers October 17, 2014

2014 Law Student Trial Competition Questions and Answers October 17, 2014 2014 Law Student Trial Competition Questions and Answers October 17, 2014 Q. Brandi Boots is said to have graduated high school in 1995, but in 2011 was only 23 years old. Can we get clarification on this?

More information

Kingsley v. Hendrickson, et al.

Kingsley v. Hendrickson, et al. Kingsley v. Hendrickson, et al. The following summary is merely a compilation of some of the statements attributable to witnesses and others who interacted with or witnessed the interaction among and/or

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F OPINION FILED FEBRUARY 9, 2005

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F OPINION FILED FEBRUARY 9, 2005 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F214745 DWIGHT D. SEAGRAVES, EMPLOYEE DELTA CONSOLIDATED INDUSTRIES, EMPLOYER GAB ROBINS, INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT

More information

SUMMARY JURY TRIALS IN NORTH CAROLINA

SUMMARY JURY TRIALS IN NORTH CAROLINA SUMMARY JURY TRIALS IN NORTH CAROLINA Lawrence Egerton, Jr. Egerton & Associates, P.A. Greensboro, NC (336) 273-0508 INTRODUCTION In 1983, Jim Exum, Former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of North Carolina

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT JACKSON December 9, 2004 Session

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT JACKSON December 9, 2004 Session IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT JACKSON December 9, 2004 Session LOUCINDRA TAYLOR V. AMERICAN PROTECTION INSURANCE CO., ET AL. Direct Appeal from the Chancery

More information

Argumentative Questions (Badgering) Assuming Facts Not in Evidence (Extrapolation) Irrelevant Evidence Hearsay Opinion Lack of Personal Knowledge

Argumentative Questions (Badgering) Assuming Facts Not in Evidence (Extrapolation) Irrelevant Evidence Hearsay Opinion Lack of Personal Knowledge Argumentative Questions (Badgering) Assuming Facts Not in Evidence (Extrapolation) Irrelevant Evidence Hearsay Opinion Lack of Personal Knowledge Asked and Answered Outside the Scope of Cross Examination

More information

JUDGE DENISE POSSE LINDBERG STOCK CIVIL JURY INSTRUCTIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS

JUDGE DENISE POSSE LINDBERG STOCK CIVIL JURY INSTRUCTIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS JUDGE DENISE POSSE LINDBERG STOCK CIVIL JURY INSTRUCTIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS Stock Opening Instructions Introduction and General Instructions... 1 Summary of the Case... 2 Role of Judge, Jury and Lawyers...

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED March 3, 2009 v No. 280427 Wayne Circuit Court ZACHERY SCOTT GILLAY, LC No. 07-007463-01 Defendant-Appellant.

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION Case 1:13-mi-99999-UNA Document 2231 Filed 10/18/13 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION MARTHE BIEN-AIME, R.N., * * Plaintiff, * * CIVIL ACTION

More information

2017 STAC Fact Pattern Clarifications

2017 STAC Fact Pattern Clarifications 2017 STAC Fact Pattern Clarifications Editor s Note In addition to the questions answered below, the fact pattern has been reposted, revised to reflect the following changes: The stipulations have been

More information

CHAPTER 13 - STANDARDS FOR JAIL FACILITIES - INMATE BEHAVIOR, DISCIPLINE AND GRIEVANCE

CHAPTER 13 - STANDARDS FOR JAIL FACILITIES - INMATE BEHAVIOR, DISCIPLINE AND GRIEVANCE LAST ISSUE DATE - AUGUST 9, 1980 TITLE 81 - JAIL STANDARDS BOARD CHAPTER 13 - STANDARDS FOR JAIL FACILITIES - INMATE BEHAVIOR, DISCIPLINE AND GRIEVANCE 001 It is the policy of the State of Nebraska that

More information

UPDATE MEMORANDUM 2016 ISBA High School Mock Trial Invitational

UPDATE MEMORANDUM 2016 ISBA High School Mock Trial Invitational UPDATE MEMORANDUM 2016 ISBA High School Mock Trial Invitational Dunn v. Davies First Update Memo 1/4/2016 ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY TEAMS 1. Question: It seems jury instructions explain analysis

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F LATOYA NESBITT, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT OUACHITA COUNTY MED. CTR., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F LATOYA NESBITT, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT OUACHITA COUNTY MED. CTR., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F309992 LATOYA NESBITT, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT OUACHITA COUNTY MED. CTR., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT RISK MANAGEMENT RESOURCES, TPA RESPONDENT OPINION

More information

MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION RULES

MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION RULES MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION RULES The annual Mock Trial Competition is governed by the rules set forth below. These rules are designed to ensure excellence in presentation and fairness in scoring all trials

More information

Mock Trial Practice Law Test

Mock Trial Practice Law Test Mock Trial Practice Law Test NOTE: The practice law test is provided as an example and will not be updated each year. Below are sample questions that are similar to those that students may see on the real

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F OPINION FILED JULY 28, 2008

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F OPINION FILED JULY 28, 2008 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F704816 ARNOLD DRONE, EMPLOYEE NESTLE USA, INC., EMPLOYER INS. CO-STATE OF PA, INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED

More information

18 ARMIENTI, DEBELLIS, GUGLIELMO & RHODEN, LLP BROADWAY, SUITE 520 New York, NY BY: HORACE O. RHODEN, ESQ. By: VANESSA CORCHIA, ESQ.

18 ARMIENTI, DEBELLIS, GUGLIELMO & RHODEN, LLP BROADWAY, SUITE 520 New York, NY BY: HORACE O. RHODEN, ESQ. By: VANESSA CORCHIA, ESQ. Page 1 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 2 COUNTY OF KINGS: CIVIL TERM : PART 66 3 --------------------------------------------------X ROSEMARY MCNIGHT : 4 - against - :IND.# :23705/10 5 NEW YORK

More information

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Court of Appeals of Ohio [Cite as State v. Belle, 2012-Ohio-3808.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 97652 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs. JAMES BELLE DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

More information

Clarification Questions and Answers

Clarification Questions and Answers Clarification Questions and Answers For purposes of this competition, the answer to any clarification question shall be treated as a stipulation during the trial. The competitors are bound by the answers

More information

MIDDLE SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE

MIDDLE SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE MIDDLE SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE Revised August 2015 Rules Unique to Middle School Mock Trial I. Invention of Facts and Extrapolation The object of these rules is to prevent a team

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON No. 511 October 25, 2017 407 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON In the Matter of M. M. A., a Youth. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. M. M. A., Appellant. Washington County Circuit Court J140225;

More information

2:16-cv EIL # 106 Page 1 of 20

2:16-cv EIL # 106 Page 1 of 20 2:16-cv-02222-EIL # 106 Page 1 of 20 E-FILED Friday, 18 May, 2018 03:51:00 PM Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD Members of the jury, you have seen and heard all the evidence and will hear the arguments

More information

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals RENDERED: JANUARY 6, 2012; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2010-CA-000559-DG K.B., A CHILD UNDER EIGHTEEN APPELLANT ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. G CATHERINE WILLIAMSON, Employee. BUTTERFIELD TRAIL VILLAGE, INC.

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. G CATHERINE WILLIAMSON, Employee. BUTTERFIELD TRAIL VILLAGE, INC. BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. G205226 CATHERINE WILLIAMSON, Employee BUTTERFIELD TRAIL VILLAGE, INC., Employer STAR INSURANCE COMPANY, Carrier CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT

More information

SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA Rel: January 12, 2018 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama

More information

FINAL SUPPLEMENT TO CASE MATERIALS. The Wisawe Chapter of Friends of Bog Turtles v. ZenoPharma, Inc.

FINAL SUPPLEMENT TO CASE MATERIALS. The Wisawe Chapter of Friends of Bog Turtles v. ZenoPharma, Inc. 1/18/12 FINAL SUPPLEMENT TO CASE MATERIALS The Wisawe Chapter of Friends of Bog Turtles v. ZenoPharma, Inc. The deadline for submitting questions was January 18, 2012. THIS IS THE FINAL AND IS THE OFFICIAL

More information

TRIAL ADVOCACY - FALL 2005

TRIAL ADVOCACY - FALL 2005 TRIAL ADVOCACY - FALL 2005 Thomas K. Maher 312 W Franklin Street Chapel Hill, N.C. 27516 (O) 929-1043 (H) 933-5674 TKMaher@tkmaherlaw.com General Instructions 1. General Information. The class will meet

More information

FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE # 80 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA

FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE # 80 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE # 80 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA The Opinions handed down on the 19th day of October, 2004, are as follows: BY KIMBALL, J.: 2004- C-0181 LAURA E. TRUNK

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F HARTFORD UNDERWRITES INS. CO. CARRIER OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 24, 2008

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F HARTFORD UNDERWRITES INS. CO. CARRIER OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 24, 2008 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F801328 LILA MOORE LABARGE, INC. HARTFORD UNDERWRITES INS. CO. CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 24, 2008 Hearing

More information

MEDIA STATEMENT CRIMINAL JUSTICE BRANCH

MEDIA STATEMENT CRIMINAL JUSTICE BRANCH MEDIA STATEMENT CRIMINAL JUSTICE BRANCH December 23, 2014 14-28 No Charges Approved in Abbotsford IIO Investigation Victoria The Criminal Justice Branch, Ministry of Justice (CJB) announced today that

More information

Second, you must not be influenced by sympathy, passion or prejudice in favor of any party or against any of the parties.

Second, you must not be influenced by sympathy, passion or prejudice in favor of any party or against any of the parties. CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS Members of the jury, we now come to that part of the case where I must give you the instructions on the law. If you cannot hear me, please raise your hand. It is important that you

More information

GENERAL CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS. Members of the jury, it is now time for me to tell you the law that applies to

GENERAL CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS. Members of the jury, it is now time for me to tell you the law that applies to GENERAL CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS Members of the jury, it is now time for me to tell you the law that applies to this case. As I mentioned at the beginning of the trial, you must follow the law as I state it

More information

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2013-0451, Tara Carver v. Leigh F. Wheeler, M.D. & a., the court on May 7, 2014, issued the following order: The plaintiff, Tara Carver, appeals the

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE November 29, 2005 Session

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE November 29, 2005 Session IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE November 29, 2005 Session ROBERT MERRIMON v. BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE, INC. Direct Appeal from the Chancery Court

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G CHERITA WILLIAMS, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED FEBRUARY 21, 2017

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G CHERITA WILLIAMS, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED FEBRUARY 21, 2017 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G604341 CHERITA WILLIAMS, EMPLOYEE STAFFMARK, EMPLOYER ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION

More information

INSTRUCTIONS AFTER JURY IS SWORN

INSTRUCTIONS AFTER JURY IS SWORN Revised 10/15/12 INSTRUCTIONS AFTER JURY IS SWORN Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, you have been selected as the jury in this case. As you know this is a criminal case, and to assist you in better understanding

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION 2:17-cv-13241-BAF-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 10/03/17 Pg 1 of 20 Pg ID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION SHARON STEIN, as Personal Representative of the Estate of JOHN

More information

SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE

SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE Table of Contents INTRODUCTION...3 TEXAS CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Title 1, Chapter 38...3 TEXAS RULES OF EVIDENCE Article I: General Provisions...4 Article IV: Relevancy

More information

Defendant(s). / ORDER REGARDING RULE EXAMINATION 1 Pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure ( Examination of Persons ),

Defendant(s). / ORDER REGARDING RULE EXAMINATION 1 Pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure ( Examination of Persons ), IN THE CIRCUIT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH, COUNTY, FLORIDA CIRCUIT CIVIL DIVISION AA CASE NO.: vs. Plaintiff(s), Defendant(s). / ORDER REGARDING RULE 1.360 EXAMINATION 1 Pursuant

More information

STATE OF OHIO ) CASE NO. CR ) Plaintiff, ) JUDGE JOHN P. O DONNELL ) vs. ) ) ROBERT M. PENNINGTON ) JOURNAL ENTRY ) Defendant.

STATE OF OHIO ) CASE NO. CR ) Plaintiff, ) JUDGE JOHN P. O DONNELL ) vs. ) ) ROBERT M. PENNINGTON ) JOURNAL ENTRY ) Defendant. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO STATE OF OHIO ) CASE NO. CR 12 568808 ) Plaintiff, ) JUDGE JOHN P. O DONNELL ) vs. ) ) ROBERT M. PENNINGTON ) JOURNAL ENTRY ) Defendant. ) John P. O Donnell,

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 16-3970 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DAJUAN KEY, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court

More information

Davis, Betty J. v. Life Line Screening of America, Ltd.

Davis, Betty J. v. Life Line Screening of America, Ltd. University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims and Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Law 4-25-2017 Davis, Betty J.

More information

The Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless, et al. v. Brunner, Jennifer, etc.

The Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless, et al. v. Brunner, Jennifer, etc. 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 3 THE NORTHEAST OHIO ) 4 COALITION FOR THE ) HOMELESS, ET AL., ) 5 ) Plaintiffs, ) 6 ) vs. ) Case No. C2-06-896 7 ) JENNIFER BRUNNER,

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F BILLY RAY THARP, EMPLOYEE JUSTICE FARMS, INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT NO.

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F BILLY RAY THARP, EMPLOYEE JUSTICE FARMS, INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT NO. BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F311119 BILLY RAY THARP, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT JUSTICE FARMS, INC., EMPLOYER RESPONDENT NO. 1 COMMERCE & INDUSTRY INSURANCE CO., CARRIER RESPONDENT

More information

HINTS FOR PREPARING FOR THE MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION

HINTS FOR PREPARING FOR THE MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION 2012 - HINTS FOR PREPARING FOR THE MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Trial Overview 1 A. Governing Rules 1 B. Trial Basics 1 II. Opening Statements 2 A. Structure And Outline To Organize Your

More information

MOTION FOR CHANGE OF PARENTING TIME (COMPANIONSHIP AND VISITATION) LAWRENCE COUNTY, OHIO

MOTION FOR CHANGE OF PARENTING TIME (COMPANIONSHIP AND VISITATION) LAWRENCE COUNTY, OHIO MOTION FOR CHANGE OF PARENTING TIME (COMPANIONSHIP AND VISITATION) LAWRENCE COUNTY, OHIO You should only use these forms if there is already a custody and parenting order issued by the Domestic Relations

More information

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED, SENTENCE VACATED, AND CASE REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. Division III Opinion by: JUDGE NEY* Davidson, C.J., and Sternberg*, J.

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED, SENTENCE VACATED, AND CASE REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. Division III Opinion by: JUDGE NEY* Davidson, C.J., and Sternberg*, J. COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No.: 08CA1709 Adams County District Court No. 07JD673 Honorable Harlan R. Bockman, Judge The People of the State of Colorado, Petitioner-Appellee, In the Interest

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F FAYETTEVILLE VETERANS HOME PUBLIC EMPLOYEE CLAIMS DIVISION, INSURANCE CARRIER

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F FAYETTEVILLE VETERANS HOME PUBLIC EMPLOYEE CLAIMS DIVISION, INSURANCE CARRIER BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F706853 LISA EAGLE FAYETTEVILLE VETERANS HOME PUBLIC EMPLOYEE CLAIMS DIVISION, INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 4, 2013

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 4, 2013 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G102263 MARIA BREWER TYSON POULTRY, INC. TYNET CORPORATION CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 4, 2013 Hearing before

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F BRITTANY EVANS, EMPLOYEE CATFISH LANDING, EMPLOYER

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F BRITTANY EVANS, EMPLOYEE CATFISH LANDING, EMPLOYER BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F311785 BRITTANY EVANS, EMPLOYEE CATFISH LANDING, EMPLOYER FIRSTCOMP INSURANCE COMPANY, INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION

More information

SPRING 2009 May 7, 2009 FINAL EXAM SAMPLE ANSWER MULTIPLE CHOICE

SPRING 2009 May 7, 2009 FINAL EXAM SAMPLE ANSWER MULTIPLE CHOICE TORTS II PROFESSOR DEWOLF SPRIN 2009 May 7, 2009 FINAL EXAM SAMPLE ANSWER MULTIPLE CHOICE 1. (A) is incorrect, because of the doctrine of transferred intent. (B) is incorrect, because Susan could still

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F MARVIN G. WOODBERRY, EMPLOYEE H & H CONCRETE CO., EMPLOYER

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F MARVIN G. WOODBERRY, EMPLOYEE H & H CONCRETE CO., EMPLOYER BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F501804 MARVIN G. WOODBERRY, EMPLOYEE H & H CONCRETE CO., EMPLOYER AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE CO., TPA CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION

More information

NEW YORK STATE HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL TOURNAMENT RULES

NEW YORK STATE HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL TOURNAMENT RULES NEW YORK STATE HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL TOURNAMENT RULES PART I 5 This page left intentionally blank. 6 MOCK TRIAL TOURNAMENT RULES 1. TEAM COMPOSITION a. The Mock Trial Tournament is open to all 9th 12th

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F DAVID RIDDLE, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED JANUARY 4, 2005

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F DAVID RIDDLE, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED JANUARY 4, 2005 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F301506 DAVID RIDDLE, EMPLOYEE MAVERICK TRANSPORTATION, INC., EMPLOYER LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE CO., INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT

More information

Forest County Circuit Court Rules (Ninth Judicial District)

Forest County Circuit Court Rules (Ninth Judicial District) Forest County Circuit Court Rules (Ninth Judicial District) RULE 1: RULE 2: RULE 3: RULE 4: RULE 5: RULE 6: RULE 7: RULE 8: Rules of Decorum Facsimile Transmissions Foreclosure Mediation Program Jury Fees

More information

NO. CAAP IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

NO. CAAP IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I NO. CAAP-15-0000906 IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I STATE OF HAWAI'I, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GREGORY FOWLER HAAS, Defendant-Appellant APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRD

More information

TRIAL PRACTICE No SPRING 2012

TRIAL PRACTICE No SPRING 2012 TRIAL PRACTICE No. 613 - SPRING 2012 William F. Martson, Jr. Tonkon Torp LLP 888 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 1600 Portland, OR 97204 (0) 503-802-2005 (C) 503-799-5743 Email: rick.martson(tonkon.com General

More information

SUMMARY JURY TRIAL PART: QUEENS COUNTY SUPREME COURT RULES AND PROCEDURES

SUMMARY JURY TRIAL PART: QUEENS COUNTY SUPREME COURT RULES AND PROCEDURES SUMMARY JURY TRIAL PART: QUEENS COUNTY SUPREME COURT RULES AND PROCEDURES Nature of the Binding Summary Jury Trial: A summary jury trial is generally a oneday jury trial with relaxed rules of evidence

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 JESSE WASHINGTON, Plaintiff, v. R. SAMUELS, Defendant. Case No.: :-cv-00-sab (PC ORDER REGARDING PARTIES MOTIONS IN LIMINE [ECF Nos. 0 & 0]

More information

[For counsel appearing before the Civil Divisions of the 9th Circuit Court in Orange County]

[For counsel appearing before the Civil Divisions of the 9th Circuit Court in Orange County] GUIDELINES REGARDING COMPULSORY MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO FLA. R. CIV. P. 1.360(a)(1)(A) & IF ORDERED (B), AS WELL AS 1.360(b) AND 1.390(b) & (c) 1 [For counsel appearing before the Civil

More information

NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT UNIFORM GUIDELINES REGARDING COMPULSORY MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS

NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT UNIFORM GUIDELINES REGARDING COMPULSORY MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT UNIFORM GUIDELINES REGARDING COMPULSORY MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO FLA. R. CIV. P. 1.360(a)(1)(A) & IF ORDERED (B), AS WELL AS 1.360(b) AND 1.390(b) & (c) 1

More information

RULES OF COURT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ADJUDICATION

RULES OF COURT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ADJUDICATION RULES OF COURT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ADJUDICATION Workshop on Environmental Adjudication For the Green Bench Judges of Bhutan Judge Kathie Stein U.S. EPA Environmental Appeals Board Thimphu, Bhutan July 2018

More information

Appendix 3J Training Memo How a Prosecutor Reads a Domestic Violence Related Police Report

Appendix 3J Training Memo How a Prosecutor Reads a Domestic Violence Related Police Report Appendix 3J Training Memo How a Prosecutor Reads a Domestic Violence Related Police Report Adapted from Domestic Violence: The Law Enforcement Response, a training curriculum from The Domestic Abuse Intervention

More information

Judge Declan P. Mansfield Judicial Practice Preferences Section H, J3 & J7

Judge Declan P. Mansfield Judicial Practice Preferences Section H, J3 & J7 Judge Declan P. Mansfield Judicial Practice Preferences Section H, J3 & J7 Judicial Assistant: Donna Belcher dbelcher@jud6.org (727) 847-8172 Office Telephone Number (727) 815-7100 Hearing Line Number

More information

Lee Stewart v. Pennsylvania Department of Cor

Lee Stewart v. Pennsylvania Department of Cor 2017 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 1-31-2017 Lee Stewart v. Pennsylvania Department of Cor Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2017

More information

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN March 5, 2004 GEORGE E. WALLACE

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN March 5, 2004 GEORGE E. WALLACE PRESENT: All the Justices MARGARET BARKLEY v. Record No. 030744 OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN March 5, 2004 GEORGE E. WALLACE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF HAMPTON Norman Olitsky, Judge

More information

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version)

FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version) FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version) (ADOPTED 9/4/2012) INDEX ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS Rule 101 Scope... 1 Rule 102 Purpose and Construction... 1 ARTICLE II. JUDICIAL NOTICE... 1 Rule 201

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR COUNTY, FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA, Plaintiff, DATE FILED IN OPEN COURT D.C. vs. _ Defendant. CASE NO.: / CRIMINAL DIVISION: VIOLATION OF PROBATION/COMMUNITY

More information

1. If several suspected offenders are involved in the same criminal. accusation or indictment, no defense attorney shall be allowed to represent

1. If several suspected offenders are involved in the same criminal. accusation or indictment, no defense attorney shall be allowed to represent Form TJ-110, INSTRUCTION FOR CRIMINAL JURY TRIAL PROCEEDINGS (Sections 6, 7, and 16, Rule 3, of the JSR) Recommendation: 1. If several suspected offenders are involved in the same criminal accusation or

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS MICHAEL VIVIANI, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED October 11, 2012 v No. 303258 Wayne Circuit Court DAVID R. SCHLEIF, M.D., BON SECOURS LC No. 08-018211-NH COTTAGE HEALTH

More information

NO. 47,037-WCA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * Versus * * * * * *

NO. 47,037-WCA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * Versus * * * * * * Judgment rendered April 11, 2012. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, LSA-CCP. NO. 47,037-WCA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * ALVIN

More information

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F209409 CHRISTOPHER M. CHILDERS, EMPLOYEE GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION, EMPLOYER SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT

More information

INTRODUCTION OF EXHIBITS AT TRIAL THE BASICS

INTRODUCTION OF EXHIBITS AT TRIAL THE BASICS INTRODUCTION OF EXHIBITS AT TRIAL THE BASICS What are exhibits? Exhibits are types of evidence that are tangible. There are basically four types of exhibits. First, there is real evidence (the gun involved

More information

EVALUATOR MANUAL TRANSMITTAL SHEET

EVALUATOR MANUAL TRANSMITTAL SHEET STATE OF CALIFORNIA - HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES EVALUATOR MANUAL TRANSMITTAL SHEET Distribution: Transmittal No. 07RM-02 X All Child Care Evaluator Manual Holders All

More information

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA George Boettger, : Petitioner : : v. : No. 294 C.D. 2013 : Submitted: July 19, 2013 Workers Compensation : Appeal Board : (School District of Philadelphia), :

More information

Review of Orange County Detention Facilities

Review of Orange County Detention Facilities Review of Orange County Detention Facilities Review of Orange County Detention Facilities SUMMARY The 2010-2011 Grand Jury has completed an inspection of all the detention facilities in Orange County under

More information

State of Wisconsin: Circuit Court: Racine County: v. Case Nos. 2002CF763, 973,1215

State of Wisconsin: Circuit Court: Racine County: v. Case Nos. 2002CF763, 973,1215 State of Wisconsin: Circuit Court: Racine County: State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff, v. Case Nos. 2002CF763, 973,1215 Thomas C. Burton, Defendant. Defendant's Memorandum in Opposition to State's Motion in

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F OPINION FILED MARCH 10, 2006

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F OPINION FILED MARCH 10, 2006 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F214745 DWIGHT D. SEAGRAVES, EMPLOYEE DELTA CONSOLIDATED INDUSTRIES, EMPLOYER GAB ROBINS, INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT

More information

FILE IN THE DEARBORN SUPERIOR CCOU413 II 2012

FILE IN THE DEARBORN SUPERIOR CCOU413 II 2012 STATE OF INDIANA )SS: COUNTY OF DEARBORN ) STATE OF INDIANA, ) Plaintiff, ) FILE IN THE DEARBORN SUPERIOR CCOU413 II 2012 CLERK OF DEARBORN CIRCUIT COURT CAUSE NO. 15D021103-FD-084 v. DANIEL BREWINGTON,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 5:10-cv CAR-CHW.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 5:10-cv CAR-CHW. Willie Wright, Jr. v. Theron Harrison Doc. 1107421649 Case: 12-14466 Date Filed: 04/02/2014 Page: 1 of 20 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 12-14466 Non-Argument

More information

Judge Declan P. Mansfield Judicial Practice Preferences Section H, J3 & J7

Judge Declan P. Mansfield Judicial Practice Preferences Section H, J3 & J7 Judge Declan P. Mansfield Judicial Practice Preferences Section H, J3 & J7 Judicial Assistant: Donna Belcher dbelcher@jud6.org (727) 847-8172 Office Telephone Number (727) 815-7100 Hearing Line Number

More information

LAWRENCE COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT LOCAL RULES RULE ONE

LAWRENCE COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT LOCAL RULES RULE ONE LAWRENCE COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT LOCAL RULES All Local Rules of Court will become effective upon approval by the Supreme Court Committee on technology and the Court. A. TERMS, HOURS, AND SESSIONS RULE ONE

More information

GENERAL ORDER DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA I. BACKGROUND

GENERAL ORDER DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA I. BACKGROUND GENERAL ORDER DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Title Court Appearance Notifications Series / Number GO PCA 701.06 Effective Date August 2, 2005 Distribution Rescinds General Order 701.06 (Court Appearance Notifications)

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO. : (Appeal from Common Pleas Court, Juvenile Division) Rendered on the 13th day of December, 2002.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO. : (Appeal from Common Pleas Court, Juvenile Division) Rendered on the 13th day of December, 2002. [Cite as In re Gooch, 2002-Ohio-6859.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO IN RE: : JOHN P. GOOCH, JR. : : : C.A. Case No. 19339 : T.C. Case No. 02-JC-1034........... : (Appeal from Common

More information

RALPH ALPHONSO ELLIOTT, JR. OPINION BY v. Record No JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR. April 17, 2009 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

RALPH ALPHONSO ELLIOTT, JR. OPINION BY v. Record No JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR. April 17, 2009 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA Present: All the Justices RALPH ALPHONSO ELLIOTT, JR. OPINION BY v. Record No. 081536 JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR. April 17, 2009 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA This

More information

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before HOLMES, PORFILIO, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before HOLMES, PORFILIO, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. JERRY L. HARROLD, FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit Plaintiff-Appellant, FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT November 12, 2008 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court v.

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED April 26, 2011 v No. 296732 Wayne Circuit Court ALBERT THOMAS ANDERSON, LC No. 09-007971-FH Defendant-Appellant.

More information

HOT TOPIC ISSUE: SPOILATION. General Liability Track, Session 3 Fifth Annual General Liability & Workers Compensation Seminar

HOT TOPIC ISSUE: SPOILATION. General Liability Track, Session 3 Fifth Annual General Liability & Workers Compensation Seminar HOT TOPIC ISSUE: SPOILATION General Liability Track, Session 3 Fifth Annual General Liability & Workers Compensation Seminar Carlock, Copeland & Stair Speaker: Scott Huray, Partner WHAT IS IT? Spoliation

More information

CHAPTER 16 FORMAL ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

CHAPTER 16 FORMAL ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS CHAPTER 16 FORMAL ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS I. INTRODUCTION Formal administrative hearings are one of the options provided to a person who has significant (or substantial) interests that will be affected

More information

ORDER REGARDING RULE EXAMINATION. Pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure ( Examination of Persons ),

ORDER REGARDING RULE EXAMINATION. Pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure ( Examination of Persons ), IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO.: vs. Plaintiff(s), Defendant(s). / ORDER REGARDING RULE 1.360 EXAMINATION Pursuant to Florida Rule

More information

GUIDELINES FOR COUNSEL REGARDING COMPULSORY MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO FLA. R. CIV. P.

GUIDELINES FOR COUNSEL REGARDING COMPULSORY MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO FLA. R. CIV. P. GUIDELINES FOR COUNSEL REGARDING COMPULSORY MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO FLA. R. CIV. P. 1.360(A)(1)(A) & IF ORDERED (B), AS WELL AS 1.360(B) AND 1.390(B) & (C) 1 [For counsel appearing before

More information

EXPLAINING THE COURTS AN INFORMATION BOOKLET

EXPLAINING THE COURTS AN INFORMATION BOOKLET EXPLAINING THE COURTS AN INFORMATION BOOKLET AT SOME STAGE IN OUR LIVES, EVERY ONE OF US IS LIKELY TO HAVE TO GO TO COURT FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER. WE MIGHT BE ASKED TO SIT ON A JURY OR TO GIVE EVIDENCE

More information

Legal Definitions: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z A

Legal Definitions: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z A Legal Definitions: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z A Acquittal a decision of not guilty. Advisement a court hearing held before a judge to inform the defendant about the charges against

More information

GUIDELINES FOR COUNSEL REGARDING COMPULSORY MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS

GUIDELINES FOR COUNSEL REGARDING COMPULSORY MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS GUIDELINES FOR COUNSEL REGARDING COMPULSORY MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO FLA. R. CIV. P. 1.360(a)(1)(A) & (if ordered) (b), as well as 1.360(b) and 1.390(b) & (c) [Division 40 - Judge Margaret

More information

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F206497 TRUDY NICHOLS, EMPLOYEE WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION, EMPLOYER HELMSMAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INSURANCE CARRIER

More information

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F DANIEL R. POWELL, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED FEBRUARY 23, 2009

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F DANIEL R. POWELL, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED FEBRUARY 23, 2009 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F805852 DANIEL R. POWELL, EMPLOYEE MARK FLEMING INDIVIDUALLY OR MARK FLEMING D/B/A F & F, INC., UNINSURED EMPLOYER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT OPINION

More information

REVISED February 4, 2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

REVISED February 4, 2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS REVISED February 4, 2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D January 13, 2011 MARK DUVALL No. 09-10660 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

More information

PRETRIAL INSTRUCTIONS. CACI No. 100

PRETRIAL INSTRUCTIONS. CACI No. 100 PRETRIAL INSTRUCTIONS CACI No. 100 You have now been sworn as jurors in this case. I want to impress on you the seriousness and importance of serving on a jury. Trial by jury is a fundamental right in

More information