Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

A sneak attack on open justice

Article Abstract:

The US Judicial Conference's Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure should reject the proposed changes to the Federal Rules that it will vote on at its meeting on July 6-7, 1995. The changes would let judges issue protective orders whenever both parties agreed on them, rather than requiring good cause for secrecy to be shown, a relatively stringent test. That would mean many critical documents about hazardous products would not be available, and would give defendants too much power to exchange quick disclosure for guaranteed secrecy.

Author: Bryant, Arthur, Sir
Publisher: ALM Media, Inc.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1995
Standards, United States, Public and closed trials, Right to public trial

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


'Tjoflat' fees rule is argued in court

Article Abstract:

Rule 46-1(d)(1) and (d)(2) of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has been criticized by lawyers as interfering in criminal defense and fee setting. The rule, known as the 'Tjoflat rule,' requires attorneys to represent defendants until another counsel appears or is appointed. A second provision states that the court will not appoint counsel on appeal without a review of previous fee arrangements. Attorneys fear that trial lawyers will be forced to appeal and that the court will determine the reasonableness of fees.

Author: Andelman, Bob
Publisher: ALM Media, Inc.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1992
Laws, regulations and rules, Compensation and benefits, Court-appointed counsel, Court appointed counsel, United States. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Excerpts: 7th Circuit rules on fees

Article Abstract:

The case In the Matter of Continental Illinois Securities Litigation is to be remanded to determine by the going market rate what a just legal fee award should be. The mistake the trial court made was to hold that judges rather than the market had the power to determine what a just fee award should be. What fees the market might award can be evaluated by determining what contingent fees a lawyer might receive when obtaining the $45 million damages award that was won in this case.

Author: Posner, Richard A.
Publisher: ALM Media, Inc.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1992
Class actions (Civil procedure), Cases, Class action lawsuits

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Public opinion, Court rules, Attorneys, Lawyers' fees
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Juvenile and criminal justice systems' responses to youth violence. Juvenile offenders in the adult criminal justice system
  • Abstracts: Insider signaling and insider trading with repurchase tender offers. Civil procedure - D.C. Circuit rejects sliding scale approach to finding personal jurisdiction based on Internet contacts -GTE New Media Services v. BellSouth Corp
  • Abstracts: Adopting an Executive Protection Program. Fiber Optics: A Quantum Leap in Security Line Supervision
  • Abstracts: Predation and multiproduct firms: an economic appraisal of the Sievers-Albery results. Strategic allocation of overhead: the application of traditional predation tests to multiproduct firms
  • Abstracts: Retroactivity of 1991 law still debated. Rights act's retroactivity still disputed. Adjudicative retroactivity in administrative law
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.