0:35
Judge Sonia Sotomayor: Court is Where Policy is Made
Judge Sonia Sotomayor: Court is Where Policy is Made
Follow us on Twitter - twitter.com/verumserum. Visit us at www.verumserum.com.
1:31
Italy Appeals Court Clears Knox of Murder
Italy Appeals Court Clears Knox of Murder
An Italian appeals court has thrown out Amanda Knox's murder conviction and ordered the young American freed after nearly four years in prison for the death of her British roommate. (Oct. 3)
65:11
Appellate Courts and Independent Experts
Appellate Courts and Independent Experts
April 4, 2007 Speaker: Douglas H. Ginsburg, Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Presented by: the Center for Business Law and Regulation Summary: The Dean Lindsey Cowen Business Law Lecture Douglas H. Ginsburg is Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, to which he was appointed by President Reagan in 1986. He is also Distinguished Adjunct Professor of Law at George Mason University School of Law, and Visiting Lecturer and Charles J. Merriam Scholar at the University of Chicago Law School. Judge Ginsburg previously served as a Professor of Law at Harvard Law School; as Director of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget; and as Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice. Judge Ginsburg is a graduate of Cornell University and of the University of Chicago Law School ('73), where he was the Articles Editor of the Law Review. He is a member of the American Economic Association, the American Law and Economics Association, and the Mont Pelerin Society. Judge Ginsburg serves on the Judicial Advisory Board of the Law and Economics Center at George Mason University School of Law.
50:59
Goldstein vs. UDC NYS Appeals Court Proceedings
Goldstein vs. UDC NYS Appeals Court Proceedings
Oct 14, 2009. Go to www.dddb.net for more information.
9:57
Part 1 Moot Court Open Appellate Education meeting 2.22.10
Part 1 Moot Court Open Appellate Education meeting 2.22.10
Presiding Judge of the 2nd panel in the Oregon Appellate Court, Judge Landau, spoke with us on effective oral advocacy.
2:51
Kevin Trudeau Appeals Court Decision - From: WGN TV
Kevin Trudeau Appeals Court Decision - From: WGN TV
Source: WGN Chicago Infomercial pitchman Kevin Trudeau has filed an appeal of his contempt citation and 30-day jail sentence, hours before he is scheduled to surrender to US marshals this afternoon. Trudeau's lawyer, Kimball Anderson, read a statement after court saying Trudeau believed he had committed no crime and that the court had "exceeded the permissible bounds of its authority." "He believes that he was simply exercising his First Amendment rights and was permissibly encouraging others to do the same," the statement read. www.wgntv.com
4:28
Appeals Court Rejects Gay Marriage Ban
Appeals Court Rejects Gay Marriage Ban
California's Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the state's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional. WSJ's Jess Bravin visits Mean Street to discuss.
4:51
Sawyier, Duff & Waltz for Appellate Court Judge (Political Ad, 1978)
Sawyier, Duff & Waltz for Appellate Court Judge (Political Ad, 1978)
Here's an extended political ad for three Republican "blue ribbon" candidates for Cook County Appellate Court Judge - Calvin P. Sawyier, Brian B. Duff and Jon R. Waltz - who were running as a team, free of political influence and pledging to answer to the people. The three speak individually and together about their respective records and qualifications. Voiceover by ?? Paid for by Committee for Better Courts. "...An outstanding team of blue-ribbon candidates..." This aired on local Chicago TV on Thursday, October 19th 1978 at a few minutes before 10am. About The Museum of Classic Chicago Television: The Museum of Classic Chicago Television's primary mission is the preservation and display of off-air, early home videotape recordings (70s and early 80s, primarily) recorded off of any and all Chicago TV channels; footage which would likely be lost if not sought out and preserved digitally. Even though (mostly) short clips are displayed here, we preserve the entire broadcasts in our archives - the complete programs with breaks (or however much is present on the tape), for historical purposes. For information on how to help in our mission, to donate or lend tapes to be converted to DVD, and to view more of the 3800+ (and counting) video clips available for viewing in our online archive, please visit us at: www.fuzzymemories.tv
66:10
Padilla v. Lever 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 2006
Padilla v. Lever 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 2006
Courtesy C-SPAN, courts.gov 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 6/22/2006, C-SPAN Program ID: 193153-1 From C-SPAN's Description: The full panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Padilla v. Lever over allegations that Orange County, California, election officials violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by not providing petitions in both English and Spanish for the recall of a Santa Ana Unified District school board member. In November 2005, a Ninth Circuit three-judge panel ruled that Orange County election officials violated the bilingual requirements of the Voting Rights Act.
121:07
CA Appellate Court Legacy Project -- Justice Charles Vogel, LLB '59
CA Appellate Court Legacy Project -- Justice Charles Vogel, LLB '59
An interview with UCLA Law alum, Justice Charles Vogel, LLB '59, as part of the California Appellate Court Legacy Project. In 2006, the California Appellate Court Legacy Project was developed as part of statewide efforts undertaken to commemorate the Centennial of the California Courts of Appeal in 2005. Each of the judges interviewed here is a UCLA School of Law alum. Please note that these videos are copyrighted by the Judicial Council of California and are not for copying and/or distribution. The Legacy Project recounts the stories and preserves the rich judicial history of California judges, courts and law through the voices of the justices who helped shape the development of California law in the 20th century. More information about the Project is available at www.courts.ca.gov
4:39
Second Appellate Court Changing the California Constitution
Second Appellate Court Changing the California Constitution
The Second Appellate Court does not find an (Abuse of Discretion) in their July 28, 2010 published decision P. 6 and 7 or, that it is a Prejudicial Error for the County of San Luis Obispo-or Union Pacific Railroad to withhold 150 Oceano/County whiteness-plus photo/Questionnaires/ documents from discovery until after trial July 30, 2008! TheSecond Appellate Court Justices--Steven Z. Perren Kenneth R. Yegan and Arthur Gilbert put responsibility for this culvert as stated: "The court found that the Railroad may have been negligent by failing to enlarge the culvert or requiring that its tenant do so." OK--Why is Caltrans Shoveling Debris into this drainage channel? They allow Superior Court Judge Martin J. Tangeman to withhold photo attachments that went with Exhibit # 579 showing Caltrans maintaining the Oceano Communities Storm Water Drainage Channel--Raising State Highway 1 and blocking drainage on the East Side of State Highway 1!. The Second Appellate Court does not find this to be a Prejudicial Error in California! The Second Appellate Court States Page. 7 and 8 of their June 28. 2010 decision "Even if the trial court erred in applying the statute of limitations, the trial court found that Bookout failed to carry his burden of proof as to causation in his action against the District, the County and Caltrans. Plaintiff has the burden of proving a substantial causal relationship between the defendant's act or omission and the injury. (California State Automobile Assn. v <b>...</b>
2:10
Sonia Sotomayor: Courts make policy full clip
Sonia Sotomayor: Courts make policy full clip
Longer version of the Sonia Sotomayor clip. I apologize for the poor video, but that shouldn't matter too much.
1:07
Proposition 8 Case's Possible Supreme Court Hearing After Appeals Court Ruling
Proposition 8 Case's Possible Supreme Court Hearing After Appeals Court Ruling
A federal appeals court has rejected an appeal of an earlier ruling this year that overturned Proposition 8, opening a likely path to the supreme court for the same-sex marriage debate. Proposition 8's gay marriage ban in California, passed in 2008, was ruled in violation of the constitution in February, with a 2-1 majority saying the ban served only to "lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians." But sponsors of the ban asked the 9th circuit court to rehear the case. This week, the court's majority ruled against reconsidering. The latest ruling may not be a win for gay marriage advocates, however, unless the Supreme Court rules in their favor. Prop 8 backers have 90 days to appeal to the US Supreme Court for a ruling.
9:45
part 3 Moot Court Open Appellate Education Meeting 2.22.10
part 3 Moot Court Open Appellate Education Meeting 2.22.10
Presiding Judge of the 2nd panel in the Oregon Appellate Court, Judge Landau, spoke with us on effective oral advocacy.
2:04
Caltrans District 5 Inverse Condemnation-Second Appellate Court Causation
Caltrans District 5 Inverse Condemnation-Second Appellate Court Causation
December 2006 interview with Caltrans----Notice the Oceano Community Service District well # 8 pipe submerged under this flood water as Caltrans talks about this flooding and where Caltrans storm water goes as talked about being a holding pond????Superior Court Judge Teresa Estrada-Mullaney in her February 2, 2009 Judgment Decision "Notice of Judgment" States: "Judge Tangeman determined the flooding problem was "static" for several years prior to Plaintiff's purchase of his property. Plaintiff contends the flooding is continuous and can be abated. Plaintiff argues Defendants negligent maintenance of the drainage system increases the frequency and severity of the flooding. That is inconsistent with Judge Tangeman's determination that the primary culprit was POVE's improvements, rather than negligent maintenance of the drainage system. There was no showing that Union's operation of Well No. 8 contributed to the blockage. There was no showing of the County's responsibility for maintaining the drainage channel. There was no evidence that any accumulated debris in State's right of way contributed to the problems in the operation of the drainage system. County, State, Union or OCSD could not have abated the nuisance by undertaking any maintenance The California Second Appellate Court Justices--Steven Z. Perren Kenneth R. Yegan and Arthur Gilbert have Ruled the actions below are now Permanent and legal in California, per their Appellate Court Decision June 28, 2010! Each Justice <b>...</b>
10:13
Appellate Court Rules Against Prop 8 - West Hollywood Celebrates Decision (2/7/2012)
Appellate Court Rules Against Prop 8 - West Hollywood Celebrates Decision (2/7/2012)
Supporters of marriage equality and the repeal of Proposition 8 (which defines marriage in California as between a man and a woman - so no gay marriage) gather in West Hollywood in the wake of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, calling the proposition unconstitutional. Speakers included John Duran (mayor of West Hollywood), Diane Abbott (historian and civil rights attorney), Adam Bouska (creator of the NOH8 photo campaign), and Jon Davidson (Lambda Legal). Afterwards, the crowd takes to the streets to march. February 7, 2012 - Camera & podcast: Mike Skiff for ThirdRailMedia.com
123:03
CA Appellate Court Legacy Project -- Justice Joan Dempsey Klein '54
CA Appellate Court Legacy Project -- Justice Joan Dempsey Klein '54
An interview with UCLA Law alum, Justice Joan Dempsey Klein, LLB '54, as part of the California Appellate Court Legacy Project. In 2006, the California Appellate Court Legacy Project was developed as part of statewide efforts undertaken to commemorate the Centennial of the California Courts of Appeal in 2005. Each of the judges interviewed here is a UCLA School of Law alum. Please note that these videos are copyrighted by the Judicial Council of California and are not for copying and/or distribution. The Legacy Project recounts the stories and preserves the rich judicial history of California judges, courts and law through the voices of the justices who helped shape the development of California law in the 20th century. More information about the Project is available at www.courts.ca.gov
9:15
part 2 Moot Court Open Appellate Education Meeting
part 2 Moot Court Open Appellate Education Meeting
Presiding Judge of the 2nd panel in the Oregon Appellate Court, Judge Landau, spoke with us on effective oral advocacy.
6:19
NY State Appellate Court Hearing On Columbia University's Expansion Into West Harlem
NY State Appellate Court Hearing On Columbia University's Expansion Into West Harlem
Nellie Bailey of Harlem Tenants Council was on the scene for allthingsharlem.com and she caught up with people as they exited the courthouse. She got a chance to interview State Senator Bill Perkins, Lead Plaintiffs Nick Sprayregen owner of Tuck-It-Away Self Storage and Pariminder Kaur of the Singh family and Owner of gas stations in the development parcel, Ramon Diaz owner of Floridita, Columbia student Ben Totushek, Mario Mazzoni of Coalition To Preserve Community and Attorney Norman Siegel.
96:18
CA Appellate Court Legacy Project -- Justice Elwood Lui '69
CA Appellate Court Legacy Project -- Justice Elwood Lui '69
An interview with UCLA Law alum, Justice Elwood Lui, JD '69, as part of the California Appellate Court Legacy Project. In 2006, the California Appellate Court Legacy Project was developed as part of statewide efforts undertaken to commemorate the Centennial of the California Courts of Appeal in 2005. Each of the judges interviewed here is a UCLA School of Law alum. Please note that these videos are copyrighted by the Judicial Council of California and are not for copying and/or distribution. The Legacy Project recounts the stories and preserves the rich judicial history of California judges, courts and law through the voices of the justices who helped shape the development of California law in the 20th century. More information about the Project is available at www.courts.ca.gov
1:45
Appeals Court Rejects Marcia and Edward Dooley's Bid for New Trial
Appeals Court Rejects Marcia and Edward Dooley's Bid for New Trial
The murderous parents from one of Canada's most horrific child abuse cases should not be granted a new trial, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled today. Marcia and Edward "Tony" Dooley were convicted in 2002 of second-degree murder in the death of seven-year-old Randal Dooley, whose broken, lifeless body was found in September 1998, 11 months after moving from Jamaica to live with his father and stepmother. Marcia, who was found to have delivered the fatal blow to Randal and most of his prior abuse, was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for 18 years. Her husband was sentenced to life without parole for at least 13 years. Both were appealing their convictions; Marcia was also appealing her sentence. All appeals were dismissed today. In their bid for a new trial, lawyers for the couple argued that in 2002, Justice Eugene Ewaschuk made several errors in his instructions to the jury. In his decision on behalf of the appeals court today, Justice David Doherty disagreed. The defence lawyers also presented new expert medical evidence, which was rejected. Doherty recalled the "profoundly disturbing narrative" that unfolded at the Dooley trial. "Randal lived a nightmare of parental abuse for most of his short life in Canada. That nightmare only ended when Randal succumbed to his injuries," Doherty wrote. An autopsy found 13 definite rib fractures and four possible rib fractures. Randal had acute pneumonia, various damaged internal organs, brain <b>...</b>
