I'm trying to find the exact meaning of 'motion proceedings' for a legal studies assignment!?
146120
look under british laws cause s. africa was owned by brittan, maybe in the a.m. call a high priced lawyer & ask them, cause most of the time your allowed one free question, what about ask the on line lawyer, hope you can under stand my chitter-chatter typing
1150498
http://www.lectlaw.com/def.htm
281373
try this\nhttp://library.findlaw.com/
423250
Michigan Court Rules: \nUnless otherwise specified by these rules, a judgment of conviction and sentence entered by the circuit court or the Recorder's Court for the City of Detroit not subject to appellate review under subchapters 7.200 or 7.300 may be reviewed only in accordance with the provisions of this subchapter.\n\nThe subsection defines different motions that can be filed with the court, and also the right to counsel.\n\nAs for the adequacy of representation, I couldn't find a direct definition. I did find Michgan Court Rule 6.508(D). Rule 6.508(D)(3)(b) (below) talks about an irregularity that prejudices the outcome. That would mean that there is an error, other than a jurisdictional error since those are specficially excluded, that causes the court to make a ruling that it wouldn't make without the error. So, you'd have to show a mistake that changed the outcome of the procedure.\n\nAs the other poster said, these are questions best addressed by a lawyer. If you require help, I'd suggest contacting the Michigan bar or your local public defender or legal aid for assistance.\n\n"(D) Entitlement to Relief. The defendant has the burden of establishing entitlement to the relief requested. The court may not grant relief to the defendant if the motion\n\n(1) seeks relief from a judgment of conviction and sentence that still is subject to challenge on appeal pursuant to subchapter 7.200 or subchapter 7.300;\n\n(2) alleges grounds for relief which were decided against the defendant in a prior appeal or proceeding under this subchapter, unless the defendant establishes that a retroactive change in the law has undermined the prior decision;\n\n(3) alleges grounds for relief, other than jurisdictional defects, which could have been raised on appeal from the conviction and sentence or in a prior motion under this subchapter, unless the defendant demonstrates\n\n(a) good cause for failure to raise such grounds on appeal or in the prior motion, and\n\n(b) actual prejudice from the alleged irregularities that support the claim for relief. As used in this subrule, "actual prejudice" means that,\n\n(i) in a conviction following a trial, but for the alleged error, the defendant would have had a reasonably likely chance of acquittal;\n\n(ii) in a conviction entered on a plea of guilty, guilty but mentally ill, or nolo contendere, the defect in the proceedings was such that it renders the plea an involuntary one to a degree that it would be manifestly unjust to allow the conviction to stand;\n\n(iii) in any case, the irregularity was so offensive to the maintenance of a sound judicial process that the conviction should not be allowed to stand \nregardless of its effect on the outcome of the case;\n\n(iv) in the case of a challenge to the sentence, the sentence is invalid."
382549
What the issue or question you need to answer (for class)?  And what class is it for?  Thanks.\n\n\nThis site offers the case in full: \n\nhttp://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/2001/vol1/html/2001scr1_0772.html\n\nThe above is British Columbia College of Teachers v. Trinity West University, et al., ON APPEAL.  HOWEVER, it is indexed as Trinity West University v. British Columbia College of Teachers.  \n\n\nThe site below gives a summary of the case and offers links to look at the case in full (Supreme Court Reports).\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_Western_University_v._British_Columbia_College_of_Teachers
1059141
What you are looking for is "Case Law" and "Case History". I have a link here that may help you. If it doens't, then you may have to go to the County courthouse and tell the clerk of court what you are looking for. They can direct you from there. Another place to check is at a local college that has a law program. It is likely that they have a law library that you can go and look around in. The people there can help you find what you are looking for as well. Here is the link:\n\nhttp://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?citeid=26528
854448
Certiorari granted; 35 Wis. 2d 146, 150 N. W. 2d 507, reversed.\n\nhttp://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=390&invol=519
779444
Exactly, it's not a complete sentence.\nNo doubt it informs you about your right to protest against the decision:\n\n"(You can file an appeal) against this decision within 30 days of its communication at..."\n\nThe part in parentheses is not part of the German sentence you posted, but I'm sure it belongs there, I'm sure your sentence continues with \n1) where you should address your appeal to, and\n2) "Berufung eingelegt werden" or "berufen werden" or some similar words, meaning to appeal or to file an appeal.\nI'm sure because legal language is kind of predictable... it always uses similar phrases/structure.\n\nSo in essence: You can file an appeal (=protest) against the decision within 30 days of the date on this document with the authority/department stated after the word "beim" (the last word you provided)
781130
removal proceedings is when they get the ball rolling on someone's deportation paperwork. Deportation is the act of physically removing you or sending you back to your native land. \n\nHope that helps.
803641
http://images.google.com\n\nSearch for whatever types of motion you are interested in.
420170
If the defendant has filed a motion for summary judgment, they are claiming that, under all the facts, the law is clearly on their side, to the extent that the judge may simply find in their favor. You have to be able to show that the facts are in dispute to the extent that at least some of the issues have to be resolved in a trial. Generally, a motion for summary judgment is one of the first tools a defendant will use to get out of a case. It isn't the easiest thing for the defendant to do, so you just have to show enough for the judge to believe that some issues have to be tried. In other words, question or challenge everything the defendant claims in the motion.
689121
this sounds like a concept that is specific to UK law. there is a definition in the source below but you might need to use edit/find to find the specific reference
448815
Do you mean a motion in parliamentary procedure?\nDo you mean motion as in physics?\nIn physics it is velocity relative to a plane of reference.\nYou measure it by determining the position of the item at two different times and then dividing by the difference in time.  So you get units of distance per time - velocity.\nLike miles per hour or feet per second or meters per second.
701502
It all depends on the 'constitution' of the group.  Normally a group will have a written constitution that details such rules as how complaints and challenges may be actioned.\n\nNormally a complaint of this kind is presented as a motion to the committee, this should then be debated by all parties and a vote taken.  Certain rules may then be applied as to what constitutes a carried motion.  For example it may be a simple majority, ie greater than 50% or some other calculation like at least 75% agreement must be reached for a motion to be carried.\n\nAs I say, the 'constitution' must be your first port of call to find out how to do this within any specific group or organisation.
240404
Hello:\n\nWell, it kinda looks like this but each jurisdiction has different requirements.  And, even after I show you what it looks like, you're still not gonna know what to put in the motion.  \n\nSo, my advice to you is hire an attorney, or the evidence you want to supress, AIN'T gonna be suppressed:\n\n                     IN THE STATE OF _____ \n                     COUNTY OF _______\n\nThe State of ______ )\n                    )     \n     vs.            )  Cause #\n                    )  MOTION TO SUPRESS EVIDENCE \nYou                 ) \n____________________)\n\n\nexcon\n\nPS>  So, the HTML caused everthing to not line up, but  you get the idea.
38530
It means a stipulated (that is, essential, required or agreed upon) cause of action.\n\nA "cause of action" is the reason for a lawsuit.\n\nSee link:
140022
You can go to free site, FindLaw, or just try to Google "United States v. Rosado-Fernandez" and see what you get. If you have Westlaw or Lexis you can use those