What are the best things to say as in vocabulary if you are a direct for the prosecution in a civil case?
472437
Use a thesarus and memorize many synonyms for terms unfavorable to their case.  Practice extemporizing using those terms.  \n\nPerhaps:\nguilty\nviolate\ntransgress\nnegligent\nresponsible\nharm\nsuffer\nloss
234542
An out of sourt statement by other than the person on the stand (the declarant) to assert the truth of the matter put forward.\n\nI hope this is what you needed.
406520
every time a new wittiness is called switch seats with another juror...\n\nsit with your back to the judge for an hour...\n\nsit in the audience for a day to see how the court room looks from another prospective..\n\norder pizza and have it delivered an hour after the trial starts...\n\ntake a cell phone call...\n\ntake a walkie-talkie call...\n\nhit on the defense attorney or paralegals...\n\npretend you have torrents...\n\nthe next day pretend you have amnesia...\n\neat asparagus, kimchee, wings, and beer for dinner so \n\neveryone can enjoy the a*s flute....\n\nshow up with a cooler of beer and a portable grill...(grillin n chillin)..\n\nread a news paper while the trial is going on...\n\nkeep asking the judge, witnesses, and attorneys questions...\n\nlisten to your Ipod...\n\nwatch a movie...\n\nevery time an attorney asks a question jump to your feet and shout 'AMEN!' and 'CAN I GET A WITNESS!!' switch attorneys every day...\n\ntell the judge you have a drug habit and need to be paid three times more than the other jurors...\n\nkeep giving the bailiff notes for everyone in the court telling them neat things like, their car just got towed, their house is on fire, they have just been kidnapped, there is a bomb in the building(works best for the Muslim trials), there is a stain on their pants, there is something in their teeth...
481266
This is going to depend entirely on where you are, what court you're going to, and what sort of dispute is to be heard.  The rule it refers to is probably a rule of civil or criminal procedure.  (Civil is for lawsuits, generally speaking.)  You should check with local references to find out which, or you can try asking the clerk of court for an explanation.  For the rules themselves, you may be able to find them online at findlaw.com, if you can't find them anywhere else.\n\nFrom the way you phrase it, I would guess that, in a criminal proceeding, a Rule 8 hearing may involve the prosecution needing to show cause for charges it is bringing against someone (demonstrating it has at least some evidence to support its case) and -- if there is some evidence -- formally telling the accused the charges they face (like an arraignment).  That is totally a guess, though.
912546
1. Go to your front door.\n2. Open the door.\n3. Shout out, "Is there a lawyer out there?"\n4. Stand back.
278709
Consult a lawyer.  Document everything in regards to the offense and shore up your alibis.
974154
If you are currently incarcerated, go to the law library and research some briefs on appeal. Look around you and you will find people who know how to prepare an appeal Pro Se, meaning filing your own, in an appeal you cannot present new evidence you must have a reason that something went wrong in your first trial. The most prevalent usage is ineffective council, once you have filed then you can approach lawyers and ask them to handle the case Pro Bono(free). Lawyers are mandated to handle a percentage of cases free and you might get Lucky.
815542
In my opinion, I think you have to be crafty, deceitful is a good trait! Oh! I nearly forgot! Greedy! and lies, you must be able to lie effectively! Prolong litigation for as long as you can, as it makes you more money! And take them for as much as you can! Wring your client out so no more money is left! Of course that is after you've wrung out the defendant!!!!! lol. I hope this helps! Have a good day!
977624
The first answer is correct for deposition.\n\nYou might be thinking about a disposition.  This is another word for sentencing.  In Indiana, we use the word "disposition" for juveniles, and use "sentencing" for adults.
806875
Prosecutor and transcript
44810
droit penal (with the little accent / over the e)
507611
ask a lawyer for the right and legal answer.
1012324
attorney is best opinion
671250
Malicious prosecution is a civil claim when you feel that someone has used the court system maliciously to harm you.  For instance, filing a claim lacking any merit for the sole purpose of harassing a defendant would be a good example of malicious prosecution. \n\nUnfortunately, malicious prosecution is not an easy case to make.  In California (where I practice) the defendant must first take the underlying case all the way to trial and then win.  Once he's won, he must file a separate civil action for malicious prosecution.  In that action he must prove that the prior action brought against him was so completely without merit as to be considered malicious.\n\nThis is entirely impractical from a cost perspective.  In essence, it requires you to litigate two cases:  the underlying action and the action for malicious prosecution.  To take a case to trial (depending on the case) can cost you between $20,000 and $100,000 on average.  Then you have to file a malicious prosecution suit which will cost you roughly the same amount.  Further, the chances of winning are miniscule.  \n\nWith the prospect of spending $250,000 dollars and upwards of 3 to 5 years of your life in litigation, most people don't consider malicious prosecution suits a viable option.  As such, althought a malicious prosecution suit is always available for litigants who feel they are being wrongly sued, the threat of a malicious prosecution suit has no teeth.\n\nWhat is malicious prosecution?  It is a sad, sad joke.  In my opinion, there should be better remedies available for abuse of the system.  In my opinion, the system is abused on a very regular basis and, without major tort reform, there is simply nothing you can do if you get sued wrongly.
238992
In real life, you would have a state (or foreign country's)law that explained what the prosecution needs to prove for murder (so you could show how the prosecution will fail to prove one or more parts of the crime), and probably also laws that describe what you would need to show for various defenses (such as insanity) in case the prosecution proved Macbeth did it.  But I don't know if they gave you any laws to use for your project.  (Will there be an actual jury deciding the case?  If so, will they be given instructions about murder and insanity?  If so, you would probably like to see those ahead of time, so you will know what you will be trying to convince them of.)\n\nAnyway, in general, I think you want to think through what your case will be like (who will the witnesses be, and what you believe they will say), and give a good overview to the jury, so they will understand what is going on.  If everthing you say will be backed up by testimony in the case, you are on good footing.  (You can actually tell the jury about the specific witnesses they will hear from.)  And if you can also sum up your whole position in one or two sentences that give the gist of why Macbeth should be found not guilty, that can help a lot.\n\nSince you are going second with your opening statement, you can also listen to the prosecutor's opening statement first.  If you have good responses to some of his or her points, you can try to work those into your opening statement.  That's hard (because you have to think of it at the last minute, right before you stand up, and decide where to mention it in your opening statement), but it can be really impressive.  And maybe you can kind of guess what the prosecutor will say ahead of time, so you can get a big head start on that.\n\n-------\nSince you said it's all written work, maybe try (if possible) to do the analysis of the accusations first.  Then do the closing, based on the analysis.  Then do the opening statement last, when you will know what your analysis is and where it's leading.  Then you really can "preview" your case in the opening statement, as Uppity suggested.\n\nIt would still be nice to know what the exact laws are, but if there aren't any given, you can probably base the analysis on facts from the play, general knowledge about murder and/or insanity, and what seems fair and right.  If you were on a jury, what are the things that would make you want to acquit Macbeth?
716719
This sounds like a deposition.  An attorney is obligated to investigate the facts before bringing charges in a criminal trial or filing a civil action in a law suit.  If they don't and the charges or action is wrong, the attorney can face sanctions or discipline.  The fact finding phase of a trial is known as "discovery".  Parties who have knowledge of the affair are asked questions or sign affidavits.  Both sides have an opportunity to investigate and do their own questioning of any person who would testify.  In a criminal trial, there is a constitutional right to force adverse witnesses to appear and swear by oath or affirmation in open court.\n\nIn a civil deposition, at least one attorney from either side will be present, usually at the office of the attorney who is running the deposition.  There will also be a court reporter.  One of the attorneys will ask the witness a series of questions for a maximum of 1 day of 6 hours.  The other side will make objections, but the witness still has to answer.  Those objections are later brought up before a magistrate or judge and if they are sustained, that part of the testimony will be stricken.  A witness in a deposition testifies under oath as if they were in court.  If they are later brought into court during the trial, they are bound by what they said at the deposition and could face perjury charges if they contradict themselves.\n\nFor a good view of a civil deposition, read part of the book or see the movie "A Civil Action" with John Travolta.  For criminal interrogation, Law and Order is a good drama (that is nothing like the real thing but is entertaining).\n\nAs a drama, the attorneys are trying to get the witness to reveal something or to hide something.  The witness may feel remorse but at the same time fear of punishment (from the law or the boss).  A conflict results from the lawyers who are bound by the law, and the audience who wants to see the truth revealed.  In actuallity, the role of the court is to protect each party's legal rights, promote substantial justice, and resolve disputes.  It is not the role of the court to find the truth.  The audience wants to see this however.\n\nIn most scenes, the lawyer is defeated in a deposition by words.  Either their objections fail or the words of the attorney create enough guilt to get the witness to break down and come up with the "truth".  There is a conflict between the witness and the parties of the case, between the lawyers and their clients, between the lawyers themselves, and between the lawyer and the witness.  You must discover what this conflict or relationship is between each role and this will tell you how to act.\n\nGood luck!
719106
The Rules of Professional Conduct, which varies by jurisdiction, generally prohibits a lawyer from advancing an unmeritorious argument in court, except where the lawyer is defending a criminal defendant, who is constitutionally entitled to have the government prove every element of the case against him/her beyond all reasonable doubt.\n\nJust because a case is ultimately a lost cause, does not mean that an attorney cannot make a good faith argument to defend his/her client's interests.\n\nIt is only the plaintiff/petitioner's attorney in a civil action who is ethically not permitted to advance a case where there is no meritorious good faith legal argument.\n\nAnd, as a practical matter, there are very few circumstances where some good faith argument cannot be presented.\n\nUltimately, all cases depend upon their facts, and it is impossible to accurately answer your question without knowing the facts of your particular case. So, if you believe that an attorney has taken an unmeritorious case to court against you, then you should file a complaint with the lawyer disciplinary agency in your jurisdiction, and allow the agency to investigate your claim.