- published: 22 Jan 2015
- views: 137
Create your page here
Sunday, 16 October 2016
back to playlist
Webinar by Information Governance Solutions and EMC discussing how FRCP impacts information governance issues. Originally presented October 15, 2014.
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), admission ceremony at the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow, November 6, 2013. It was a fantastic event at the Bute hall, University of Glasgow. This was the opening of the ceremony.
- published: 09 Jan 2014
- views: 1224
In this session Prof. Rose discusses how the FRE and the FRCP work together to create a particular set of checklists advocates should consider when deciding how to, or whether to, depose an expert in a civil case. This session previews the law on these issues, with particular focus on the Federal Rules of Evidence.
- published: 13 May 2015
- views: 710
(b) Discovery Scope and Limits.
(1) Scope in General. Unless otherwise limited by court order, the scope of discovery is as follows: Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense—including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any documents or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons who know of any discoverable matter. For good cause, the court may order discovery of any matter relevant to the subject matter involved in the action. Relevant information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. All discovery is subject to the limitations imposed by Rule 26(b)(2)(C).
(2) Limitations on Frequency and Extent.
(A) When Permitted. By order, the court may alter the limits in these rules on the number of depositions and interrogatories or on the length of depositions under Rule 30. By order or local rule, the court may also limit the number of requests under Rule 36.
(B) Specific Limitations on Electronically Stored Information. A party need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the party identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the party from whom discovery is sought must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(b)(2)(C). The court may specify conditions for the discovery.
(C) When Required. On motion or on its own, the court must limit the frequency or extent of discovery otherwise allowed by these rules or by local rule if it determines that:
(i) the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or can be obtained from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive;
(ii) the party seeking discovery has had ample opportunity to obtain the information by discovery in the action; or
(iii) the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, considering the needs of the case, the amount in controversy, the parties' resources, the importance of the issues at stake in the action, and the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues.
(3) Trial Preparation: Materials.
(A) Documents and Tangible Things. Ordinarily, a party may not discover documents and tangible things that are prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or its representative (including the other party's attorney, consultant, surety, indemnitor, insurer, or agent). But, subject to Rule 26(b)(4), those materials may be discovered if:
(i) they are otherwise discoverable under Rule 26(b)(1); and
(ii) the party shows that it has substantial need for the materials to prepare its case and cannot, without undue hardship, obtain their substantial equivalent by other means.
(B) Protection Against Disclosure. If the court orders discovery of those materials, it must protect against disclosure of the mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories of a party's attorney or other representative concerning the litigation.
(C) Previous Statement. Any party or other person may, on request and without the required showing, obtain the person's own previous statement about the action or its subject matter. If the request is refused, the person may move for a court order, and Rule 37(a)(5) applies to the award of expenses. A previous statement is either:
(i) a written statement that the person has signed or otherwise adopted or approved; or
(ii) a contemporaneous stenographic, mechanical, electrical, or other recording—or a transcription of it—that recites substantially verbatim the person's oral statement.
(4) Trial Preparation: Experts.
(A) Deposition of an Expert Who May Testify. A party may depose any person who has been identified as an expert whose opinions may be presented at trial. If Rule 26(a)(2)(B) requires a report from the expert, the deposition may be conducted only after the report is provided.
(B) Trial-Preparation Protection for Draft Reports or Disclosures. Rules 26(b)(3)(A) and (B) protect drafts of any report or disclosure required under Rule 26(a)(2), regardless of the form in which the draft is recorded.
(C) Trial-Preparation Protection for Communications Between a Party's Attorney and Expert Witnesses. Rules 26(b)(3)(A) and (B) protect communications between the party's attorney and any witness required to provide a report under Rule 26(a)(2)(B), regardless of the form of the communications, except to the extent that the communications:
- published: 27 Jan 2013
- views: 1915
Warner Norcross & Judd recently led a half-day Data Symposium focused on changes to the Federal Rules Civil Procedure (FRCP), eDiscovery, privacy and security, records information management and other related issues. Hon. Paul L. Maloney (Western District Court of Michigan), Andrea Bernard, B. Jay Yelton III and Scott Carvo presented during the symposium on October 23, 2015. The panel used a case study to explore how the rule amendments would play out in a litigation scenario from the perspectives of a plaintiff, a defendant, and from the bench. See the outline and time marks below if you wish to skip ahead to specific portions of the video.
Supporting documentation can be downloaded from here: http://wnj.com/frcp-video/
==================
0:00
Introductions and Presentation of the Case Study Facts
==================
3:25
Request for Production of Documents
Amendment to Rule 26
Plaintiff's Discovery Requests and Approach
Defendant's Discovery Requests and Approach
==================
12:00
Pretrial Conference
Plaintiff's Approach
Defendant's Approach
==================
33:00
Responses to Request for Production of Documents
Amendment to Rule 34
Plaintiff's Approach
Defendant's Approach
==================
42:00
Motions for Spoliation
Amendment to Rule 37
Plaintiff's Approach
Defendant's Approach
==================
End
- published: 22 Nov 2015
- views: 223
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, aka FRCP, govern court procedures for civil lawsuits. Although most states have their own rules of civil procedure, most state rules are similar to the FRCP.
On December 1, 2006, a new set of revisions dealing with electronic discovery took effect. These revisions now make it easier for the courts and litigating parties to manage electronic records and discovery around a common set of regulations.
- published: 14 Jan 2012
- views: 1422
(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.
(1) Conference Timing. Except in a proceeding exempted from initial disclosure under Rule 26(a)(1)(B) or when the court orders otherwise, the parties must confer as soon as practicable—and in any event at least 21 days before a scheduling conference is to be held or a scheduling order is due under Rule 16(b).
(2) Conference Content; Parties' Responsibilities. In conferring, the parties must consider the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for promptly settling or resolving the case; make or arrange for the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1); discuss any issues about preserving discoverable information; and develop a proposed discovery plan. The attorneys of record and all unrepresented parties that have appeared in the case are jointly responsible for arranging the conference, for attempting in good faith to agree on the proposed discovery plan, and for submitting to the court within 14 days after the conference a written report outlining the plan. The court may order the parties or attorneys to attend the conference in person.
(3) Discovery Plan. A discovery plan must state the parties' views and proposals on:
(A) what changes should be made in the timing, form, or requirement for disclosures under Rule 26(a), including a statement of when initial disclosures were made or will be made;
(B) the subjects on which discovery may be needed, when discovery should be completed, and whether discovery should be conducted in phases or be limited to or focused on particular issues;
(C) any issues about disclosure or discovery of electronically stored information, including the form or forms in which it should be produced;
(D) any issues about claims of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation materials, including—if the parties agree on a procedure to assert these claims after production—whether to ask the court to include their agreement in an order;
(E) what changes should be made in the limitations on discovery imposed under these rules or by local rule, and what other limitations should be imposed; and
(F) any other orders that the court should issue under Rule 26(c) or under Rule 16(b) and (c).
(4) Expedited Schedule. If necessary to comply with its expedited schedule for Rule 16(b) conferences, a court may by local rule:
(A) require the parties' conference to occur less than 21 days before the scheduling conference is held or a scheduling order is due under Rule 16(b); and
(B) require the written report outlining the discovery plan to be filed less than 14 days after the parties' conference, or excuse the parties from submitting a written report and permit them to report orally on their discovery plan at the Rule 16(b) conference.
- published: 27 Jan 2013
- views: 2587
A first look and first impression of his new knife. Truly great EDC knife.
specs Overall Length:8.03"
Blade Length:3.37"
Cutting Edge:2.88"
Blade Thickness:0.125"
Blade Material:CTS-BD1
Blade Style:Leaf-Shaped
Blade Grind:Flat
Finish:Black
Edge Type:Plain
Handle Length:4.66"
Handle Thickness:0.45"
Handle Material:FRCP
Color:Black
Weight:3.00 oz.
User:Right Hand, Left Hand
Pocket Clip:Tip-Up
Knife Type:Manual
Opener:Thumb Hole
Lock Type:Ball Bearing Lock
Brand:Spyderco
Model:Manix 2
Model Number:C101BBK2
Country of Origin:USA
- published: 26 Jul 2015
- views: 4451
- Loading...
-
51:12Be Prepared: How The New Changes To The FRCP Affect Information Governance
Be Prepared: How The New Changes To The FRCP Affect Information GovernanceBe Prepared: How The New Changes To The FRCP Affect Information Governance
Webinar by Information Governance Solutions and EMC discussing how FRCP impacts information governance issues. Originally presented October 15, 2014. -
1:24My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), Admission Ceremony, RCPSG
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), Admission Ceremony, RCPSGMy Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), Admission Ceremony, RCPSG
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), admission ceremony at the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow, November 6, 2013. It was a fantastic event at the Bute hall, University of Glasgow. This was the opening of the ceremony. -
28:52How Experts Work Under the FRE and FRCP
How Experts Work Under the FRE and FRCPHow Experts Work Under the FRE and FRCP
In this session Prof. Rose discusses how the FRE and the FRCP work together to create a particular set of checklists advocates should consider when deciding how to, or whether to, depose an expert in a civil case. This session previews the law on these issues, with particular focus on the Federal Rules of Evidence. -
18:25How the FRCP impact Deposing Experts
How the FRCP impact Deposing Experts -
13:24F R C P 45 - Motion to Quash Subpoena explained by Attorney Steve
F R C P 45 - Motion to Quash Subpoena explained by Attorney Steve -
7:34FRCP Rule 26(b) Discovery Scope and Limits
FRCP Rule 26(b) Discovery Scope and LimitsFRCP Rule 26(b) Discovery Scope and Limits
(b) Discovery Scope and Limits. (1) Scope in General. Unless otherwise limited by court order, the scope of discovery is as follows: Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense—including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any documents or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons who know of any discoverable matter. For good cause, the court may order discovery of any matter relevant to the subject matter involved in the action. Relevant information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. All discovery is subject to the limitations imposed by Rule 26(b)(2)(C). (2) Limitations on Frequency and Extent. (A) When Permitted. By order, the court may alter the limits in these rules on the number of depositions and interrogatories or on the length of depositions under Rule 30. By order or local rule, the court may also limit the number of requests under Rule 36. (B) Specific Limitations on Electronically Stored Information. A party need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the party identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the party from whom discovery is sought must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(b)(2)(C). The court may specify conditions for the discovery. (C) When Required. On motion or on its own, the court must limit the frequency or extent of discovery otherwise allowed by these rules or by local rule if it determines that: (i) the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or can be obtained from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive; (ii) the party seeking discovery has had ample opportunity to obtain the information by discovery in the action; or (iii) the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, considering the needs of the case, the amount in controversy, the parties' resources, the importance of the issues at stake in the action, and the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues. (3) Trial Preparation: Materials. (A) Documents and Tangible Things. Ordinarily, a party may not discover documents and tangible things that are prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or its representative (including the other party's attorney, consultant, surety, indemnitor, insurer, or agent). But, subject to Rule 26(b)(4), those materials may be discovered if: (i) they are otherwise discoverable under Rule 26(b)(1); and (ii) the party shows that it has substantial need for the materials to prepare its case and cannot, without undue hardship, obtain their substantial equivalent by other means. (B) Protection Against Disclosure. If the court orders discovery of those materials, it must protect against disclosure of the mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories of a party's attorney or other representative concerning the litigation. (C) Previous Statement. Any party or other person may, on request and without the required showing, obtain the person's own previous statement about the action or its subject matter. If the request is refused, the person may move for a court order, and Rule 37(a)(5) applies to the award of expenses. A previous statement is either: (i) a written statement that the person has signed or otherwise adopted or approved; or (ii) a contemporaneous stenographic, mechanical, electrical, or other recording—or a transcription of it—that recites substantially verbatim the person's oral statement. (4) Trial Preparation: Experts. (A) Deposition of an Expert Who May Testify. A party may depose any person who has been identified as an expert whose opinions may be presented at trial. If Rule 26(a)(2)(B) requires a report from the expert, the deposition may be conducted only after the report is provided. (B) Trial-Preparation Protection for Draft Reports or Disclosures. Rules 26(b)(3)(A) and (B) protect drafts of any report or disclosure required under Rule 26(a)(2), regardless of the form in which the draft is recorded. (C) Trial-Preparation Protection for Communications Between a Party's Attorney and Expert Witnesses. Rules 26(b)(3)(A) and (B) protect communications between the party's attorney and any witness required to provide a report under Rule 26(a)(2)(B), regardless of the form of the communications, except to the extent that the communications: -
73:52Panel Discussion on Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP)
Panel Discussion on Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP)Panel Discussion on Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP)
Warner Norcross & Judd recently led a half-day Data Symposium focused on changes to the Federal Rules Civil Procedure (FRCP), eDiscovery, privacy and security, records information management and other related issues. Hon. Paul L. Maloney (Western District Court of Michigan), Andrea Bernard, B. Jay Yelton III and Scott Carvo presented during the symposium on October 23, 2015. The panel used a case study to explore how the rule amendments would play out in a litigation scenario from the perspectives of a plaintiff, a defendant, and from the bench. See the outline and time marks below if you wish to skip ahead to specific portions of the video. Supporting documentation can be downloaded from here: http://wnj.com/frcp-video/ ================== 0:00 Introductions and Presentation of the Case Study Facts ================== 3:25 Request for Production of Documents Amendment to Rule 26 Plaintiff's Discovery Requests and Approach Defendant's Discovery Requests and Approach ================== 12:00 Pretrial Conference Plaintiff's Approach Defendant's Approach ================== 33:00 Responses to Request for Production of Documents Amendment to Rule 34 Plaintiff's Approach Defendant's Approach ================== 42:00 Motions for Spoliation Amendment to Rule 37 Plaintiff's Approach Defendant's Approach ================== End -
4:22"The new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - FRCP"
"The new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - FRCP""The new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - FRCP"
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, aka FRCP, govern court procedures for civil lawsuits. Although most states have their own rules of civil procedure, most state rules are similar to the FRCP. On December 1, 2006, a new set of revisions dealing with electronic discovery took effect. These revisions now make it easier for the courts and litigating parties to manage electronic records and discovery around a common set of regulations. -
2:19FRCP Rule 26(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.
FRCP Rule 26(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.FRCP Rule 26(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.
(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery. (1) Conference Timing. Except in a proceeding exempted from initial disclosure under Rule 26(a)(1)(B) or when the court orders otherwise, the parties must confer as soon as practicable—and in any event at least 21 days before a scheduling conference is to be held or a scheduling order is due under Rule 16(b). (2) Conference Content; Parties' Responsibilities. In conferring, the parties must consider the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for promptly settling or resolving the case; make or arrange for the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1); discuss any issues about preserving discoverable information; and develop a proposed discovery plan. The attorneys of record and all unrepresented parties that have appeared in the case are jointly responsible for arranging the conference, for attempting in good faith to agree on the proposed discovery plan, and for submitting to the court within 14 days after the conference a written report outlining the plan. The court may order the parties or attorneys to attend the conference in person. (3) Discovery Plan. A discovery plan must state the parties' views and proposals on: (A) what changes should be made in the timing, form, or requirement for disclosures under Rule 26(a), including a statement of when initial disclosures were made or will be made; (B) the subjects on which discovery may be needed, when discovery should be completed, and whether discovery should be conducted in phases or be limited to or focused on particular issues; (C) any issues about disclosure or discovery of electronically stored information, including the form or forms in which it should be produced; (D) any issues about claims of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation materials, including—if the parties agree on a procedure to assert these claims after production—whether to ask the court to include their agreement in an order; (E) what changes should be made in the limitations on discovery imposed under these rules or by local rule, and what other limitations should be imposed; and (F) any other orders that the court should issue under Rule 26(c) or under Rule 16(b) and (c). (4) Expedited Schedule. If necessary to comply with its expedited schedule for Rule 16(b) conferences, a court may by local rule: (A) require the parties' conference to occur less than 21 days before the scheduling conference is held or a scheduling order is due under Rule 16(b); and (B) require the written report outlining the discovery plan to be filed less than 14 days after the parties' conference, or excuse the parties from submitting a written report and permit them to report orally on their discovery plan at the Rule 16(b) conference. -
7:01Spyderco Manix 2 Lightweight Black FRCP CTS-BD1
Spyderco Manix 2 Lightweight Black FRCP CTS-BD1Spyderco Manix 2 Lightweight Black FRCP CTS-BD1
A first look and first impression of his new knife. Truly great EDC knife. specs Overall Length:8.03" Blade Length:3.37" Cutting Edge:2.88" Blade Thickness:0.125" Blade Material:CTS-BD1 Blade Style:Leaf-Shaped Blade Grind:Flat Finish:Black Edge Type:Plain Handle Length:4.66" Handle Thickness:0.45" Handle Material:FRCP Color:Black Weight:3.00 oz. User:Right Hand, Left Hand Pocket Clip:Tip-Up Knife Type:Manual Opener:Thumb Hole Lock Type:Ball Bearing Lock Brand:Spyderco Model:Manix 2 Model Number:C101BBK2 Country of Origin:USA
-
Be Prepared: How The New Changes To The FRCP Affect Information Governance
Webinar by Information Governance Solutions and EMC discussing how FRCP impacts information governance issues. Originally presented October 15, 2014.
published: 22 Jan 2015 -
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), Admission Ceremony, RCPSG
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), admission ceremony at the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow, November 6, 2013. It was a fantastic event at the Bute hall, University of Glasgow. This was the opening of the ceremony.
published: 09 Jan 2014 -
How Experts Work Under the FRE and FRCP
In this session Prof. Rose discusses how the FRE and the FRCP work together to create a particular set of checklists advocates should consider when deciding how to, or whether to, depose an expert in a civil case. This session previews the law on these issues, with particular focus on the Federal Rules of Evidence.
published: 13 May 2015 -
-
-
FRCP Rule 26(b) Discovery Scope and Limits
(b) Discovery Scope and Limits. (1) Scope in General. Unless otherwise limited by court order, the scope of discovery is as follows: Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense—including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any documents or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons who know of any discoverable matter. For good cause, the court may order discovery of any matter relevant to the subject matter involved in the action. Relevant information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. All discovery is subject to the limitations imposed by Rule 26(b)(2)(C). (2) Limitati...
published: 27 Jan 2013 -
Panel Discussion on Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP)
Warner Norcross & Judd recently led a half-day Data Symposium focused on changes to the Federal Rules Civil Procedure (FRCP), eDiscovery, privacy and security, records information management and other related issues. Hon. Paul L. Maloney (Western District Court of Michigan), Andrea Bernard, B. Jay Yelton III and Scott Carvo presented during the symposium on October 23, 2015. The panel used a case study to explore how the rule amendments would play out in a litigation scenario from the perspectives of a plaintiff, a defendant, and from the bench. See the outline and time marks below if you wish to skip ahead to specific portions of the video. Supporting documentation can be downloaded from here: http://wnj.com/frcp-video/ ================== 0:00 Introductions and Presentation of the Case ...
published: 22 Nov 2015 -
"The new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - FRCP"
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, aka FRCP, govern court procedures for civil lawsuits. Although most states have their own rules of civil procedure, most state rules are similar to the FRCP. On December 1, 2006, a new set of revisions dealing with electronic discovery took effect. These revisions now make it easier for the courts and litigating parties to manage electronic records and discovery around a common set of regulations.
published: 14 Jan 2012 -
FRCP Rule 26(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.
(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery. (1) Conference Timing. Except in a proceeding exempted from initial disclosure under Rule 26(a)(1)(B) or when the court orders otherwise, the parties must confer as soon as practicable—and in any event at least 21 days before a scheduling conference is to be held or a scheduling order is due under Rule 16(b). (2) Conference Content; Parties' Responsibilities. In conferring, the parties must consider the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for promptly settling or resolving the case; make or arrange for the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1); discuss any issues about preserving discoverable information; and develop a proposed discovery plan. The attorneys of record and all unrepresented parties that ...
published: 27 Jan 2013 -
Spyderco Manix 2 Lightweight Black FRCP CTS-BD1
A first look and first impression of his new knife. Truly great EDC knife. specs Overall Length:8.03" Blade Length:3.37" Cutting Edge:2.88" Blade Thickness:0.125" Blade Material:CTS-BD1 Blade Style:Leaf-Shaped Blade Grind:Flat Finish:Black Edge Type:Plain Handle Length:4.66" Handle Thickness:0.45" Handle Material:FRCP Color:Black Weight:3.00 oz. User:Right Hand, Left Hand Pocket Clip:Tip-Up Knife Type:Manual Opener:Thumb Hole Lock Type:Ball Bearing Lock Brand:Spyderco Model:Manix 2 Model Number:C101BBK2 Country of Origin:USA
published: 26 Jul 2015
Be Prepared: How The New Changes To The FRCP Affect Information Governance
- Order: Reorder
- Duration: 51:12
- Updated: 22 Jan 2015
- views: 137
Webinar by Information Governance Solutions and EMC discussing how FRCP impacts information governance issues. Originally presented October 15, 2014.
Webinar by Information Governance Solutions and EMC discussing how FRCP impacts information governance issues. Originally presented October 15, 2014.
wn.com/Be Prepared How The New Changes To The Frcp Affect Information Governance
Webinar by Information Governance Solutions and EMC discussing how FRCP impacts information governance issues. Originally presented October 15, 2014.
- published: 22 Jan 2015
- views: 137
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), Admission Ceremony, RCPSG
- Order: Reorder
- Duration: 1:24
- Updated: 09 Jan 2014
- views: 1224
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), admission ceremony at the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow, November 6, 2013. It was a fantastic event at the But...
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), admission ceremony at the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow, November 6, 2013. It was a fantastic event at the Bute hall, University of Glasgow. This was the opening of the ceremony.
wn.com/My Fellowship, Frcp(Glasg), Admission Ceremony, Rcpsg
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), admission ceremony at the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow, November 6, 2013. It was a fantastic event at the Bute hall, University of Glasgow. This was the opening of the ceremony.
- published: 09 Jan 2014
- views: 1224
How Experts Work Under the FRE and FRCP
- Order: Reorder
- Duration: 28:52
- Updated: 13 May 2015
- views: 710
In this session Prof. Rose discusses how the FRE and the FRCP work together to create a particular set of checklists advocates should consider when deciding how...
In this session Prof. Rose discusses how the FRE and the FRCP work together to create a particular set of checklists advocates should consider when deciding how to, or whether to, depose an expert in a civil case. This session previews the law on these issues, with particular focus on the Federal Rules of Evidence.
wn.com/How Experts Work Under The Fre And Frcp
In this session Prof. Rose discusses how the FRE and the FRCP work together to create a particular set of checklists advocates should consider when deciding how to, or whether to, depose an expert in a civil case. This session previews the law on these issues, with particular focus on the Federal Rules of Evidence.
- published: 13 May 2015
- views: 710
How the FRCP impact Deposing Experts
- Order: Reorder
- Duration: 18:25
- Updated: 13 May 2015
- views: 317
In this session Prof. Rose discusses how the FRCP, specifically FRCP 26 and 37, should impact an advocates decisions about how and when to conduct depositions o...
In this session Prof. Rose discusses how the FRCP, specifically FRCP 26 and 37, should impact an advocates decisions about how and when to conduct depositions of experts.
wn.com/How The Frcp Impact Deposing Experts
F R C P 45 - Motion to Quash Subpoena explained by Attorney Steve
- Order: Reorder
- Duration: 13:24
- Updated: 07 Jul 2016
- views: 45
http://www.MotionToQuash.net
In this litigation warrior video episode, Attorney Steve, the IP, software & copyright infringement lawyer explains FRCP Rule 45 M...
http://www.MotionToQuash.net
In this litigation warrior video episode, Attorney Steve, the IP, software & copyright infringement lawyer explains FRCP Rule 45 Motion to Quash federal court subpoenas.
wn.com/F R C P 45 Motion To Quash Subpoena Explained By Attorney Steve
FRCP Rule 26(b) Discovery Scope and Limits
- Order: Reorder
- Duration: 7:34
- Updated: 27 Jan 2013
- views: 1915
(b) Discovery Scope and Limits.
(1) Scope in General. Unless otherwise limited by court order, the scope of discovery is as follows: Parties may obtain discove...
(b) Discovery Scope and Limits.
(1) Scope in General. Unless otherwise limited by court order, the scope of discovery is as follows: Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense—including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any documents or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons who know of any discoverable matter. For good cause, the court may order discovery of any matter relevant to the subject matter involved in the action. Relevant information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. All discovery is subject to the limitations imposed by Rule 26(b)(2)(C).
(2) Limitations on Frequency and Extent.
(A) When Permitted. By order, the court may alter the limits in these rules on the number of depositions and interrogatories or on the length of depositions under Rule 30. By order or local rule, the court may also limit the number of requests under Rule 36.
(B) Specific Limitations on Electronically Stored Information. A party need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the party identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the party from whom discovery is sought must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(b)(2)(C). The court may specify conditions for the discovery.
(C) When Required. On motion or on its own, the court must limit the frequency or extent of discovery otherwise allowed by these rules or by local rule if it determines that:
(i) the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or can be obtained from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive;
(ii) the party seeking discovery has had ample opportunity to obtain the information by discovery in the action; or
(iii) the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, considering the needs of the case, the amount in controversy, the parties' resources, the importance of the issues at stake in the action, and the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues.
(3) Trial Preparation: Materials.
(A) Documents and Tangible Things. Ordinarily, a party may not discover documents and tangible things that are prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or its representative (including the other party's attorney, consultant, surety, indemnitor, insurer, or agent). But, subject to Rule 26(b)(4), those materials may be discovered if:
(i) they are otherwise discoverable under Rule 26(b)(1); and
(ii) the party shows that it has substantial need for the materials to prepare its case and cannot, without undue hardship, obtain their substantial equivalent by other means.
(B) Protection Against Disclosure. If the court orders discovery of those materials, it must protect against disclosure of the mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories of a party's attorney or other representative concerning the litigation.
(C) Previous Statement. Any party or other person may, on request and without the required showing, obtain the person's own previous statement about the action or its subject matter. If the request is refused, the person may move for a court order, and Rule 37(a)(5) applies to the award of expenses. A previous statement is either:
(i) a written statement that the person has signed or otherwise adopted or approved; or
(ii) a contemporaneous stenographic, mechanical, electrical, or other recording—or a transcription of it—that recites substantially verbatim the person's oral statement.
(4) Trial Preparation: Experts.
(A) Deposition of an Expert Who May Testify. A party may depose any person who has been identified as an expert whose opinions may be presented at trial. If Rule 26(a)(2)(B) requires a report from the expert, the deposition may be conducted only after the report is provided.
(B) Trial-Preparation Protection for Draft Reports or Disclosures. Rules 26(b)(3)(A) and (B) protect drafts of any report or disclosure required under Rule 26(a)(2), regardless of the form in which the draft is recorded.
(C) Trial-Preparation Protection for Communications Between a Party's Attorney and Expert Witnesses. Rules 26(b)(3)(A) and (B) protect communications between the party's attorney and any witness required to provide a report under Rule 26(a)(2)(B), regardless of the form of the communications, except to the extent that the communications:
wn.com/Frcp Rule 26(B) Discovery Scope And Limits
(b) Discovery Scope and Limits.
(1) Scope in General. Unless otherwise limited by court order, the scope of discovery is as follows: Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense—including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any documents or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons who know of any discoverable matter. For good cause, the court may order discovery of any matter relevant to the subject matter involved in the action. Relevant information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. All discovery is subject to the limitations imposed by Rule 26(b)(2)(C).
(2) Limitations on Frequency and Extent.
(A) When Permitted. By order, the court may alter the limits in these rules on the number of depositions and interrogatories or on the length of depositions under Rule 30. By order or local rule, the court may also limit the number of requests under Rule 36.
(B) Specific Limitations on Electronically Stored Information. A party need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the party identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the party from whom discovery is sought must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(b)(2)(C). The court may specify conditions for the discovery.
(C) When Required. On motion or on its own, the court must limit the frequency or extent of discovery otherwise allowed by these rules or by local rule if it determines that:
(i) the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or can be obtained from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive;
(ii) the party seeking discovery has had ample opportunity to obtain the information by discovery in the action; or
(iii) the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, considering the needs of the case, the amount in controversy, the parties' resources, the importance of the issues at stake in the action, and the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues.
(3) Trial Preparation: Materials.
(A) Documents and Tangible Things. Ordinarily, a party may not discover documents and tangible things that are prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or its representative (including the other party's attorney, consultant, surety, indemnitor, insurer, or agent). But, subject to Rule 26(b)(4), those materials may be discovered if:
(i) they are otherwise discoverable under Rule 26(b)(1); and
(ii) the party shows that it has substantial need for the materials to prepare its case and cannot, without undue hardship, obtain their substantial equivalent by other means.
(B) Protection Against Disclosure. If the court orders discovery of those materials, it must protect against disclosure of the mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories of a party's attorney or other representative concerning the litigation.
(C) Previous Statement. Any party or other person may, on request and without the required showing, obtain the person's own previous statement about the action or its subject matter. If the request is refused, the person may move for a court order, and Rule 37(a)(5) applies to the award of expenses. A previous statement is either:
(i) a written statement that the person has signed or otherwise adopted or approved; or
(ii) a contemporaneous stenographic, mechanical, electrical, or other recording—or a transcription of it—that recites substantially verbatim the person's oral statement.
(4) Trial Preparation: Experts.
(A) Deposition of an Expert Who May Testify. A party may depose any person who has been identified as an expert whose opinions may be presented at trial. If Rule 26(a)(2)(B) requires a report from the expert, the deposition may be conducted only after the report is provided.
(B) Trial-Preparation Protection for Draft Reports or Disclosures. Rules 26(b)(3)(A) and (B) protect drafts of any report or disclosure required under Rule 26(a)(2), regardless of the form in which the draft is recorded.
(C) Trial-Preparation Protection for Communications Between a Party's Attorney and Expert Witnesses. Rules 26(b)(3)(A) and (B) protect communications between the party's attorney and any witness required to provide a report under Rule 26(a)(2)(B), regardless of the form of the communications, except to the extent that the communications:
- published: 27 Jan 2013
- views: 1915
Panel Discussion on Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP)
- Order: Reorder
- Duration: 73:52
- Updated: 22 Nov 2015
- views: 223
Warner Norcross & Judd recently led a half-day Data Symposium focused on changes to the Federal Rules Civil Procedure (FRCP), eDiscovery, privacy and security, ...
Warner Norcross & Judd recently led a half-day Data Symposium focused on changes to the Federal Rules Civil Procedure (FRCP), eDiscovery, privacy and security, records information management and other related issues. Hon. Paul L. Maloney (Western District Court of Michigan), Andrea Bernard, B. Jay Yelton III and Scott Carvo presented during the symposium on October 23, 2015. The panel used a case study to explore how the rule amendments would play out in a litigation scenario from the perspectives of a plaintiff, a defendant, and from the bench. See the outline and time marks below if you wish to skip ahead to specific portions of the video.
Supporting documentation can be downloaded from here: http://wnj.com/frcp-video/
==================
0:00
Introductions and Presentation of the Case Study Facts
==================
3:25
Request for Production of Documents
Amendment to Rule 26
Plaintiff's Discovery Requests and Approach
Defendant's Discovery Requests and Approach
==================
12:00
Pretrial Conference
Plaintiff's Approach
Defendant's Approach
==================
33:00
Responses to Request for Production of Documents
Amendment to Rule 34
Plaintiff's Approach
Defendant's Approach
==================
42:00
Motions for Spoliation
Amendment to Rule 37
Plaintiff's Approach
Defendant's Approach
==================
End
wn.com/Panel Discussion On Amendments To The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure (Frcp)
Warner Norcross & Judd recently led a half-day Data Symposium focused on changes to the Federal Rules Civil Procedure (FRCP), eDiscovery, privacy and security, records information management and other related issues. Hon. Paul L. Maloney (Western District Court of Michigan), Andrea Bernard, B. Jay Yelton III and Scott Carvo presented during the symposium on October 23, 2015. The panel used a case study to explore how the rule amendments would play out in a litigation scenario from the perspectives of a plaintiff, a defendant, and from the bench. See the outline and time marks below if you wish to skip ahead to specific portions of the video.
Supporting documentation can be downloaded from here: http://wnj.com/frcp-video/
==================
0:00
Introductions and Presentation of the Case Study Facts
==================
3:25
Request for Production of Documents
Amendment to Rule 26
Plaintiff's Discovery Requests and Approach
Defendant's Discovery Requests and Approach
==================
12:00
Pretrial Conference
Plaintiff's Approach
Defendant's Approach
==================
33:00
Responses to Request for Production of Documents
Amendment to Rule 34
Plaintiff's Approach
Defendant's Approach
==================
42:00
Motions for Spoliation
Amendment to Rule 37
Plaintiff's Approach
Defendant's Approach
==================
End
- published: 22 Nov 2015
- views: 223
"The new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - FRCP"
- Order: Reorder
- Duration: 4:22
- Updated: 14 Jan 2012
- views: 1422
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, aka FRCP, govern court procedures for civil lawsuits. Although most states have their own rules of civil procedure, most s...
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, aka FRCP, govern court procedures for civil lawsuits. Although most states have their own rules of civil procedure, most state rules are similar to the FRCP.
On December 1, 2006, a new set of revisions dealing with electronic discovery took effect. These revisions now make it easier for the courts and litigating parties to manage electronic records and discovery around a common set of regulations.
wn.com/The New Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure Frcp
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, aka FRCP, govern court procedures for civil lawsuits. Although most states have their own rules of civil procedure, most state rules are similar to the FRCP.
On December 1, 2006, a new set of revisions dealing with electronic discovery took effect. These revisions now make it easier for the courts and litigating parties to manage electronic records and discovery around a common set of regulations.
- published: 14 Jan 2012
- views: 1422
FRCP Rule 26(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.
- Order: Reorder
- Duration: 2:19
- Updated: 27 Jan 2013
- views: 2587
(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.
(1) Conference Timing. Except in a proceeding exempted from initial disclosure under Rule 26(a)(1)(B) or...
(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.
(1) Conference Timing. Except in a proceeding exempted from initial disclosure under Rule 26(a)(1)(B) or when the court orders otherwise, the parties must confer as soon as practicable—and in any event at least 21 days before a scheduling conference is to be held or a scheduling order is due under Rule 16(b).
(2) Conference Content; Parties' Responsibilities. In conferring, the parties must consider the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for promptly settling or resolving the case; make or arrange for the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1); discuss any issues about preserving discoverable information; and develop a proposed discovery plan. The attorneys of record and all unrepresented parties that have appeared in the case are jointly responsible for arranging the conference, for attempting in good faith to agree on the proposed discovery plan, and for submitting to the court within 14 days after the conference a written report outlining the plan. The court may order the parties or attorneys to attend the conference in person.
(3) Discovery Plan. A discovery plan must state the parties' views and proposals on:
(A) what changes should be made in the timing, form, or requirement for disclosures under Rule 26(a), including a statement of when initial disclosures were made or will be made;
(B) the subjects on which discovery may be needed, when discovery should be completed, and whether discovery should be conducted in phases or be limited to or focused on particular issues;
(C) any issues about disclosure or discovery of electronically stored information, including the form or forms in which it should be produced;
(D) any issues about claims of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation materials, including—if the parties agree on a procedure to assert these claims after production—whether to ask the court to include their agreement in an order;
(E) what changes should be made in the limitations on discovery imposed under these rules or by local rule, and what other limitations should be imposed; and
(F) any other orders that the court should issue under Rule 26(c) or under Rule 16(b) and (c).
(4) Expedited Schedule. If necessary to comply with its expedited schedule for Rule 16(b) conferences, a court may by local rule:
(A) require the parties' conference to occur less than 21 days before the scheduling conference is held or a scheduling order is due under Rule 16(b); and
(B) require the written report outlining the discovery plan to be filed less than 14 days after the parties' conference, or excuse the parties from submitting a written report and permit them to report orally on their discovery plan at the Rule 16(b) conference.
wn.com/Frcp Rule 26(F) Conference Of The Parties Planning For Discovery.
(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.
(1) Conference Timing. Except in a proceeding exempted from initial disclosure under Rule 26(a)(1)(B) or when the court orders otherwise, the parties must confer as soon as practicable—and in any event at least 21 days before a scheduling conference is to be held or a scheduling order is due under Rule 16(b).
(2) Conference Content; Parties' Responsibilities. In conferring, the parties must consider the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for promptly settling or resolving the case; make or arrange for the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1); discuss any issues about preserving discoverable information; and develop a proposed discovery plan. The attorneys of record and all unrepresented parties that have appeared in the case are jointly responsible for arranging the conference, for attempting in good faith to agree on the proposed discovery plan, and for submitting to the court within 14 days after the conference a written report outlining the plan. The court may order the parties or attorneys to attend the conference in person.
(3) Discovery Plan. A discovery plan must state the parties' views and proposals on:
(A) what changes should be made in the timing, form, or requirement for disclosures under Rule 26(a), including a statement of when initial disclosures were made or will be made;
(B) the subjects on which discovery may be needed, when discovery should be completed, and whether discovery should be conducted in phases or be limited to or focused on particular issues;
(C) any issues about disclosure or discovery of electronically stored information, including the form or forms in which it should be produced;
(D) any issues about claims of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation materials, including—if the parties agree on a procedure to assert these claims after production—whether to ask the court to include their agreement in an order;
(E) what changes should be made in the limitations on discovery imposed under these rules or by local rule, and what other limitations should be imposed; and
(F) any other orders that the court should issue under Rule 26(c) or under Rule 16(b) and (c).
(4) Expedited Schedule. If necessary to comply with its expedited schedule for Rule 16(b) conferences, a court may by local rule:
(A) require the parties' conference to occur less than 21 days before the scheduling conference is held or a scheduling order is due under Rule 16(b); and
(B) require the written report outlining the discovery plan to be filed less than 14 days after the parties' conference, or excuse the parties from submitting a written report and permit them to report orally on their discovery plan at the Rule 16(b) conference.
- published: 27 Jan 2013
- views: 2587
Spyderco Manix 2 Lightweight Black FRCP CTS-BD1
- Order: Reorder
- Duration: 7:01
- Updated: 26 Jul 2015
- views: 4451
A first look and first impression of his new knife. Truly great EDC knife.
specs Overall Length:8.03"
Blade Length:3.37"
Cutting Edge:2.88"
Blade Thickness:0....
A first look and first impression of his new knife. Truly great EDC knife.
specs Overall Length:8.03"
Blade Length:3.37"
Cutting Edge:2.88"
Blade Thickness:0.125"
Blade Material:CTS-BD1
Blade Style:Leaf-Shaped
Blade Grind:Flat
Finish:Black
Edge Type:Plain
Handle Length:4.66"
Handle Thickness:0.45"
Handle Material:FRCP
Color:Black
Weight:3.00 oz.
User:Right Hand, Left Hand
Pocket Clip:Tip-Up
Knife Type:Manual
Opener:Thumb Hole
Lock Type:Ball Bearing Lock
Brand:Spyderco
Model:Manix 2
Model Number:C101BBK2
Country of Origin:USA
wn.com/Spyderco Manix 2 Lightweight Black Frcp Cts Bd1
A first look and first impression of his new knife. Truly great EDC knife.
specs Overall Length:8.03"
Blade Length:3.37"
Cutting Edge:2.88"
Blade Thickness:0.125"
Blade Material:CTS-BD1
Blade Style:Leaf-Shaped
Blade Grind:Flat
Finish:Black
Edge Type:Plain
Handle Length:4.66"
Handle Thickness:0.45"
Handle Material:FRCP
Color:Black
Weight:3.00 oz.
User:Right Hand, Left Hand
Pocket Clip:Tip-Up
Knife Type:Manual
Opener:Thumb Hole
Lock Type:Ball Bearing Lock
Brand:Spyderco
Model:Manix 2
Model Number:C101BBK2
Country of Origin:USA
- published: 26 Jul 2015
- views: 4451
back
- Playlist
- Chat
back
- Playlist
- Chat
51:12
Be Prepared: How The New Changes To The FRCP Affect Information Governance
Webinar by Information Governance Solutions and EMC discussing how FRCP impacts informatio...
published: 22 Jan 2015
Be Prepared: How The New Changes To The FRCP Affect Information Governance
Be Prepared: How The New Changes To The FRCP Affect Information Governance
- Report rights infringement
- published: 22 Jan 2015
- views: 137
1:24
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), Admission Ceremony, RCPSG
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), admission ceremony at the Royal College of Physicians and Surg...
published: 09 Jan 2014
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), Admission Ceremony, RCPSG
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), Admission Ceremony, RCPSG
- Report rights infringement
- published: 09 Jan 2014
- views: 1224
28:52
How Experts Work Under the FRE and FRCP
In this session Prof. Rose discusses how the FRE and the FRCP work together to create a pa...
published: 13 May 2015
How Experts Work Under the FRE and FRCP
How Experts Work Under the FRE and FRCP
- Report rights infringement
- published: 13 May 2015
- views: 710
18:25
How the FRCP impact Deposing Experts
In this session Prof. Rose discusses how the FRCP, specifically FRCP 26 and 37, should imp...
published: 13 May 2015
How the FRCP impact Deposing Experts
How the FRCP impact Deposing Experts
- Report rights infringement
- published: 13 May 2015
- views: 317
13:24
F R C P 45 - Motion to Quash Subpoena explained by Attorney Steve
http://www.MotionToQuash.net
In this litigation warrior video episode, Attorney Steve, th...
published: 07 Jul 2016
F R C P 45 - Motion to Quash Subpoena explained by Attorney Steve
F R C P 45 - Motion to Quash Subpoena explained by Attorney Steve
- Report rights infringement
- published: 07 Jul 2016
- views: 45
7:34
FRCP Rule 26(b) Discovery Scope and Limits
(b) Discovery Scope and Limits.
(1) Scope in General. Unless otherwise limited by court o...
published: 27 Jan 2013
FRCP Rule 26(b) Discovery Scope and Limits
FRCP Rule 26(b) Discovery Scope and Limits
- Report rights infringement
- published: 27 Jan 2013
- views: 1915
73:52
Panel Discussion on Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP)
Warner Norcross & Judd recently led a half-day Data Symposium focused on changes to the Fe...
published: 22 Nov 2015
Panel Discussion on Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP)
Panel Discussion on Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP)
- Report rights infringement
- published: 22 Nov 2015
- views: 223
4:22
"The new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - FRCP"
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, aka FRCP, govern court procedures for civil lawsuits...
published: 14 Jan 2012
"The new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - FRCP"
"The new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - FRCP"
- Report rights infringement
- published: 14 Jan 2012
- views: 1422
2:19
FRCP Rule 26(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.
(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.
(1) Conference Timing. Except in a...
published: 27 Jan 2013
FRCP Rule 26(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.
FRCP Rule 26(f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery.
- Report rights infringement
- published: 27 Jan 2013
- views: 2587
7:01
Spyderco Manix 2 Lightweight Black FRCP CTS-BD1
A first look and first impression of his new knife. Truly great EDC knife.
specs Overall...
published: 26 Jul 2015
Spyderco Manix 2 Lightweight Black FRCP CTS-BD1
Spyderco Manix 2 Lightweight Black FRCP CTS-BD1
- Report rights infringement
- published: 26 Jul 2015
- views: 4451
Be Prepared: How The New Changes To The FRCP Affec...
My Fellowship, FRCP(Glasg), Admission Ceremony, RC...
How Experts Work Under the FRE and FRCP...
How the FRCP impact Deposing Experts...
F R C P 45 - Motion to Quash Subpoena explained by...
FRCP Rule 26(b) Discovery Scope and Limits...
Panel Discussion on Amendments to the Federal Rule...
"The new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - FRCP"...
FRCP Rule 26(f) Conference of the Parties; Plannin...
Spyderco Manix 2 Lightweight Black FRCP CTS-BD1...
-
Lyrics list:lyrics
-
Forkboy
-
Forkboy
Forkboy
A fork is a cold shiny tool
To pierce, tear and ingest
Whoever has the fork in hand
Controls the meal of its choice
We're told the first few punctures
They're for our own good
Better carved up in pieces
Than blown up in the oven
Forkboy
Flies by night on stolen fuel
To Santa Rosa, CA
Opens a fake employment office
"Want a job? Go get me drugs"
People desperate for work
Return to quite a surprise
Busted for intent to sell
Cops pay him a bounty
Forkboy skips town
We came
We peed
We conquered
You bleed
The choice:
Fork Boy
Or finger food
Ugly joy
What does it replace?
Why wait
When you can eat
Yourself alive today
Junk bondage takeover glutton
Ready to bore in
Unfold his rotary blades inside
Pull the guts out and resell them
Buys out his next target
With the last one's pension funds
Thousands more thrown out of work
So Leona won't have to settle for a mint
Forkboy Picked by the FBI
To be the black pied piper
After Dr. King died
Watches soap operas on TV
While 6 billion disappears from HUD
Who are you working for
What did you hope to gain
Why do you hate your past
So much you destroy
The ones you love
back
Battling horror of ISIS: Iraq's bloody crisis up close
Edit CNN 16 Oct 2016
(CNN)Thousands dead. Millions more driven from their homes. A future far from certain. This is the situation in Iraq today. The deep-rooted sectarian divide that resurfaced amid the chaos of Saddam Hussein's downfall created a security vacuum that ultimately allowed extremist militant groups like ISIS to flourish. READ MORE. High stakes for Iraq's future ... Read More. CNN looks at Iraq's bloody crisis up close.. THE CRISIS IN NUMBERS ... Replay....
back
Breaking: Journalist Amy Goodman May Be Charged with 'Participating in a Riot' for Covering North ...
Edit Alternet 16 Oct 2016
Click here for reuse options!. Journalist Amy Goodman was faced with charges of trespassing that have since been dropped. A North Dakota state prosecutor has sought to charge award-winning journalist Amy Goodman with participating in a "riot" for filming an attack on Native American-led anti-pipeline protesters. The new charge comes after the prosecutor dropped criminal trespassing charges ... The charge in State of North Dakota v....
back
U.S., S. Korea: Latest N. Korea missile launch fails
Edit The Japan News 16 Oct 2016
The Associated Press SEOUL (AP) — South Korea and the United States said Sunday the latest missile launch by North Korea ended in a failure after the projectile exploded soon after liftoff. The South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff said in a statement that the military believes the North unsuccessfully attempted to fire a mid-range Musudan missile ... The U.S ... Click to play ... + - ... ....
back
Donald Trump challenges Hillary Clinton to 'take a drug test' before final debate
Edit AOL 15 Oct 2016
Donald Trump took aim at the war on drugs on Saturday — by challenging Hillary Clinton to take a drug test. "Athletes, they make them take a drug test," Trump said at a Portsmouth, New Hampshire, rally. "I think we should take a drug test prior to the debate because I don't know what's going on with her. But at the beginning of her last debate, she was all pumped up at the beginning. And by the end ... 28 PHOTOS ... See Gallery ... Up Next....
back
Syria talks in Lausanne end without breakthrough
Edit Reuters 16 Oct 2016
Talks in Switzerland aimed at securing a new ceasefire in Syria end without an agreement, but U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry says diplomats will meet again on Monday. Rough Cut (no reporter narration). ....
Cedars-Sinai Launches Precision Health to Deliver Personalized Medical Care Based on Individual Data Profiles (Cedars Sinai Medical Center)
Edit Public Technologies 13 Oct 2016
(Source. Cedars Sinai Medical Center) ... Contact Jane Engle . Email. jane.engle@cshs.org ... 'Our goal is to drive the development of the newest technology and best research, coupled to the finest clinical practice, to rapidly deliver precise and personalized healthcare solutions,' said Dermot McGovern, MD, PhD, FRCP(Lon), professor of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences and director of the campaign, known as Cedars-Sinai Precision Health ... (noodl....
Dimension Therapeutics Announces Presentations at the Upcoming European Society of Gene and Cell Therapy (ESGCT) Congress
Edit Nasdaq Globe Newswire 11 Oct 2016
CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Oct. 11, 2016 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Dimension Therapeutics, Inc ... The presentations will take place during the upcoming ESGCT Congress, taking place in Florence, Italy, October 18-21, 2016. “We are pleased that the ESCGT has chosen to highlight the innovation supporting our current and next generation HELA 2.0 AAV manufacturing platform,” said Dr. Annalisa Jenkins, MBBS, FRCP, Chief Executive Officer of Dimension ... Title....
Dimension Therapeutics Announces Presentations at the Upcoming European Society of Gene and Cell Therapy (ESGCT) Congress (Dimension Therapeutics Inc)
Edit Public Technologies 11 Oct 2016
(Source. Dimension Therapeutics Inc). CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Oct. 11, 2016 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Dimension Therapeutics, Inc ... The presentations will take place during the upcoming ESGCT Congress, taking place in Florence, Italy, October 18-21, 2016 ... Annalisa Jenkins, MBBS, FRCP, Chief Executive Officer of Dimension ... The poster presentation details are as follows.. Title ... Session Title. Poster Session II ... Location ... Tiernan, Vincent Borowy, K ... Title....
Leading Experts Warn Global Goal to Cure or Treat Alzheimer's Disease By 2025 is at Risk, Offer Solutions to Adjust Course (Eli Lilly and Company)
Edit Public Technologies 11 Oct 2016
... M.D., Mayo Clinic (U.S.); Roy Jones, BSc, MB, FRCP, DipPharmMed, Research Institute for the Care of Older People (UK); John Morris, M.D., Washington University School of Medicine (U.S.); Philip Scheltens, M.D., Ph.D., VU University Medical Center (Netherlands); and Joel Raskin, M.D., FRCPC, and Sherie Dowsett, Ph.D., from Eli Lilly and Company....
NeuroMetrix to Present at 5th Annual Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy Fellowship for Chinese Physicians at the ...
Edit Business Wire 06 Oct 2016NeuroMetrix to Present at 5th Annual Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy Fellowship for Chinese Physicians at the University of Sheffield (NeuroMetrix Inc)
Edit Public Technologies 06 Oct 2016
(Source. NeuroMetrix Inc). WALTHAM, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- NeuroMetrix, Inc. (Nasdaq. NURO, NUROW) today announced that Dr ... The fellowship is organized by Professor Solomon Tesfaye, M.D., FRCP, a world-renown expert in diabetic neuropathies. It is a training fellowship for Chinese professors who are key opinion leaders in diabetic neuropathy and are selected by the Chinese Diabetes Society from all over China ... About DPNCheck ... Source....
Dimension Therapeutics Announces Orphan Drug Designation of DTX401 for the Treatment of Glycogen Storage Disease ...
Edit Nasdaq Globe Newswire 04 Oct 2016
CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Oct. 04, 2016 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Dimension Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ.DMTX), a biopharmaceutical company advancing novel, adeno-associated virus (AAV) gene therapies targeting the liver, a key organ for human metabolism, today announced that the U.S ... “We are pleased to receive U.S ... Annalisa Jenkins, MBBS, FRCP, Chief Executive Officer of Dimension ... Background on GSDIa ... About Dimension Therapeutics ... CONTACT. CONTACT....
Dimension Therapeutics Announces Orphan Drug Designation of DTX401 for the Treatment of Glycogen Storage Disease Type Ia (GSDIa) (Dimension Therapeutics Inc)
Edit Public Technologies 04 Oct 2016
(Source. Dimension Therapeutics Inc). CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Oct. 04, 2016 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Dimension Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ.DMTX), a biopharmaceutical company advancing novel, adeno-associated virus (AAV) gene therapies targeting the liver, a key organ for human metabolism, today announced that the U.S ... 'We are pleased to receive U.S ... Annalisa Jenkins, MBBS, FRCP, Chief Executive Officer of Dimension ... Background on GSDIa ... CONTACT ... (noodl....
Almirall to Announce Late-Breaking Results for Investigational IL-23p19 inhibitor, Tildrakizumab, Achieves Primary End Point in Both Phase-3 Studies in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis (Almirall SA)
Edit Public Technologies 03 Oct 2016
(Source. Almirall SA). Barcelona, 3 October 2016. Pivotal Data of the Targeted IL-23p19 Antibody Presented for the First Time at the 25th European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Congress ... Prof. Christopher EM Griffiths MD FRCP FMedSci Foundation Professor of Dermatology, NIHR Senior Investigator the University of Manchester, and investigator in the reSURFACE phase-3 trials, affirms ... Lluis Puig, MD, PhD, Director, Dept ... 1 ... 2 ... 3....
Pre-Screening for Young Athletes at Risk of Sudden Cardiac Death: What Works and What Doesn’t, and at What Cost (Elsevier BV)
Edit Public Technologies 30 Sep 2016
(Source. Elsevier BV). New report in the Canadian Journal of Cardiology confirms ECG as best-performing screening tool with greater accuracy than physical exam. Philadelphia, PA, September 29, 2016 ... Both protocols use 12-lead ECGs and questionnaires ... 8.1%) ... $41,320.49, respectively) ... --- ... In Search of the Golden Chalice,'' by Michael Papakadis, MBBS, MD, MRCP, Sanjay Sharma, BSc (hons), MBChB, MD, FRCP (doi.org/10.1016/j.cjca.2016.08.001)....
Infinity Presents Initial Clinical And New Preclinical Data On IPI-549 At Second CRI-CIMT-EATI-AACR International Cancer Immunotherapy Conference (Infinity Pharmaceuticals Inc)
Edit Public Technologies 26 Sep 2016
(Source. Infinity Pharmaceuticals Inc). CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Sept ... (NASDAQ ... 'While there have been recent advancements in therapies as a result of our understanding of the immune response to cancer, additional treatments are needed that can improve survival for more patients,' stated Anthony Tolcher, M.D., FRCP(C), clinical director at South Texas Accelerated Research Therapeutics and an investigator for the IPI-549 Phase 1 clinical study....
Title: Lipoprotein Apheresis: a New Approach to Refractory Angina? (ESC - European Society of Cardiology)
Edit Public Technologies 21 Sep 2016
(Source. ESC - European Society of Cardiology). Rome, Italy - 29 August, 2016.. Lipoprotein apheresis, a therapy normally used to filter excess cholesterol from the blood of patients with familial hypercholesterolemia, may have a new role in patients with refractory angina ... The apheresis procedure study was conducted at Harefield Hospital, under the Directorship of the Principal Investigators Mahmoud Barbir, FRCP and Dudley Pennell, MD....
Aeglea BioTherapeutics Appoints Leading Experts to Inaugural Scientific Advisory Board
Edit Nasdaq Globe Newswire 07 Sep 2016
AUSTIN, Texas, Sept. 07, 2016 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Aeglea BioTherapeutics, Inc ... The SAB will serve as a strategic resource to Aeglea, providing scientific and clinical insights to support its pipeline of engineered human enzymes ... Lowe, Ph.D., co-founder, president and chief executive officer of Aeglea ... Ch.B., Ph.D., FRCP, former executive vice president, head of research & development and chief medical officer, Synageva BioPharma Corp....
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next page »
