Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
For example, a lawyer who must prepare a contract and who has prepared a similar contract before will often re-use, with limited changes, the old contract for the new occasion. Or a lawyer who has filed a successful motion to dismiss a lawsuit may use the same or a very similar form of motion again in another case, and so on.
Leading questions may also be permitted on direct examination when a witness requires special handling, for example a child. However, the court must take care to be sure that the examining attorney is not coaching the witness through leading questions. Courts may also cite the various editions of McCormick's and Wigmore's treatises on evidence ...
When a potential client has an interview with an attorney and tells of the legal problem, the attorney, or office paralegal, will review prior case law to find out if the client does indeed have a problem that has legal remedy. The formation of each case brief follows the same pattern: Facts, Issue, Rule, Analysis, Impact.
The theory of the case is a logical description of events that the attorney wants the judge or jury to adopt as their own perception of the underlying situation. The theory is often expressed in a story that should be compellingly probable. [9] Theme and theory become strategic tools when they serve as the core for the organization of the case.
The text of 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b) are as follows: "(b) Attorney’s fees In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of sections 1981, 1981a, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986 of this title, title IX of Public Law 92–318, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or section 12361 ...
“For example,” she says, “If you don’t want someone who is sarcastic or critical, you can say, ‘A sweet guy makes my heart melt.’” What you can say: A sense of humor.
A case theory (aka theory of case, theory of a case, or theory of the case) is “a detailed, coherent, accurate story of what occurred" involving both a legal theory (i.e., claims/causes of action or affirmative defenses) and a factual theory (i.e., an explanation of how a particular course of events could have happened). [1]
An attorney may choose to "rephrase" a question that has been objected to, so long as the judge permits it. Lawyers should make an objection before there is an answer to the question. Research finds that frequent objections by attorneys do not alienate jurors. [1]