Regardless of the acceptance of the importance of the system of proof of litigation by the judge in order to secure the rights and freedoms of the citizens and guarantee the rule of law, the issue of ...delaying the proceedings means the unreasonable and unusual prolongation of the proceedings of the cases in the judicial system to the point of rendering the sentence ineffective, as a problem. It cannot be denied that, in the meantime, the management of the judge on the proofs of the lawsuit can play a significant role in reducing the mentioned problem. Paying attention to the time of the trial and the conscious management of the judge not only leads to the satisfaction of the litigants, but also causes the mass of people to trust the judicial system and accept the verdict with satisfaction; As a result, the time and management of the proceedings should be such that the litigants, while they benefit from sufficient legal guarantees, do not create continuous tension and erosion and destruction for them. For this reason, it is very important to identify the causes and factors affecting the delay of proceedings and the role of judges in its management. Among the reasons that affect the delay of the proceedings, the role of the judge in managing the evidence to prove the claim is a fundamental and important role that in legal claims, due to the importance of the evidence to prove the claims expressed by the parties, the judge's management can prevent one of the litigants from delaying the proceedings. In this research, which has been carried out with a descriptive-analytical method, the role and function of the judge in the management of the proofs of the lawsuit and its effect on reducing the delay of the proceedings have been explored.
More than the citizens of most countries, Americans are either religious or in jail--or both. But what does it mean when imprisonment and evangelization actually go hand in hand, or at least appear ...to? What do "faith-based" prison programs mean for the constitutional separation of church and state, particularly when prisoners who participate get special privileges? In Prison Religion, law and religion scholar Winnifred Fallers Sullivan takes up these and other important questions through a close examination of a 2005 lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a faith-based residential rehabilitation program in an Iowa state prison. Americans United for the Separation of Church and State v. Prison Fellowship Ministries, a trial in which Sullivan served as an expert witness, centered on the constitutionality of allowing religious organizations to operate programs in state-run facilities. Using the trial as a case study, Sullivan argues that separation of church and state is no longer possible. Religious authority has shifted from institutions to individuals, making it difficult to define religion, let alone disentangle it from the state. Prison Religion casts new light on church-state law, the debate over government-funded faith-based programs, and the predicament of prisoners who have precious little choice about what kind of rehabilitation they receive, if they are offered any at all.
The Lessons of Lone Pine ENGSTROM, NORA FREEMAN
The Yale law journal,
10/2019, Letnik:
129, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Over the past three decades, Lone Pine orders have become a fixture of the masstort landscape. Issued in large toxic-tort cases, these case-management orders require claimants to come forward with ...prima facie injury, exposure, and causation evidence by a date certain–or else face an early and unceremonious dismissal. So far, the orders have been mostly heralded as an inventive and efficient way to streamline and expedite the resolution of complex cases. They are, many believe, an antidote to the assertion of dubious filings. Yet it's not so simple. This Article identifies and analyzes various drawbacks associated with Lone Pine orders, including their inconsistent application, incompatibility with formal procedural rules, and insistence on using a binary screen to address a question that is, at bottom, insusceptible to a binary resolution. Given these problems, it ultimately concludes that courts ought to scale back their use of this potent procedural device. But that's just the half of it. Lone Pine orders are not just important because of what they do. They are also important because of where they sit: squarely at the intersection of broader currents that are quietly transforming contemporary civil litigation. These currents include the rapid and seemingly insatiable growth of multidistrict litigation, the durable embrace of managerial judging, the counterrevolution against federal litigation, the ever-more-preliminary disposition of claims, and both the formal and informal customization of procedural mechanisms. Weaving these seemingly disparate currents together, this study offers fresh insights to deepen–and, in places, complicate–our understanding of these profoundly influential phenomena.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
BFBNIB, DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NMLJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, PRFLJ, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
ABSTRACT Research indicates that auditors have an impoverished understanding of trial preparation factors that, independent of audit quality, can significantly elevate audit litigation risk. As the ...scholarly literature sheds little insight about the nature and implications of these factors, we identify what factors audit litigators consider in trial preparation, how they expect these factors to affect litigation outcomes, and how they attempt to leverage these factors. To do so, we interview 39 audit litigators, who identify factors germane to trial venues, jury pools, and case arguments. Guided by the elaboration likelihood model, we construct a framework that predicts these factors influence litigation outcomes by changing jurors’ motivation and/or capability to elaborate. Importantly, we find that litigators who defend (sue) auditors strategically maneuver these factors to increase (decrease) the likelihood of higher juror elaboration, because higher elaboration is favorable to auditors. We discuss implications of our results for practice and research. JEL Classifications: K22; K40; K41; M4; M41; M42.
The 1954Brown v. Board of Educationdecision required desegregation of America's schools, but it also set in motion an agonizing multidecade debate over race, class, and IQ. In this innovative book, ...Michael E. Staub investigates neuropsychological studies published betweenBrownand the controversial 1994 bookThe Bell Curve. In doing so, he illuminates how we came to view race and intelligence today.In tracing how research and experiments around such concepts as learned helplessness, deferred gratification, hyperactivity, and emotional intelligence migrated into popular culture and government policy, Staub reveals long-standing and widespread dissatisfaction-not least among middle-class whites-with the metric of IQ. He also documents the devastating consequences-above all for disadvantaged children of color-as efforts to undo discrimination and create enriched learning environments were recurrently repudiated and defunded. By connecting psychology, race, and public policy in a single narrative, Staub charts the paradoxes that have emerged and that continue to structure investigations of racism even into the era of contemporary neuroscientific research.
How did British rule in India transform persons from lower social classes? Could Indians from such classes rise in the world by marrying Europeans and embracing their religion and customs? This book ...explores such questions by examining the intriguing story of an interracial family who lived in southern India in the mid-nineteenth century. The family, which consisted of two untouchable brothers, both of whom married Eurasian women, became wealthy as distillers in the local community. A family dispute resulted in a landmark court case, Abraham v. Abraham. Chandra Mallampalli uses this case to examine the lives of those involved, and shows that far from being products of a 'civilizing mission' who embraced the ways of Englishmen, the Abrahams were ultimately - when faced with the strictures of the colonial legal system - obliged to contend with hierarchy and racial difference.
ABSTRACT
Firms face a greater risk of lawsuits for overstated rather than understated earnings or net assets, suggesting conservatism can reduce firms' expected legal costs. Because managers with ...legal expertise are more likely than other managers to recognize the legal benefits of conservatism, this study examines whether legal expertise among members of senior management promotes greater conservatism. Consistent with this prediction, we find that firms with a general counsel (GC) in senior management (our proxy for legal expertise) report more conservatively. We also find that GC firms recalibrate their conservatism levels in response to changes in the legal environment—their conservatism choices are more responsive to litigation against peer firms and to two judicial rulings that affected the litigation risk for firms located in the Ninth Circuit. Overall, our findings suggest that populating senior management with legal experts affects the extent to which a firm's level of conservatism incorporates legal risks.
Data Availability: Data are available from public sources identified in the text.
JEL Classifications: K40; M41.
