|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Sept 1, 2011 9:22:42 GMT -5
Just trying to prove a point here.. Sorry you fell asleep in my class...... In Foran v Cobbe and Kelly, Supreme Court, 13 June 1996, the Supreme Court allowed a plaintiff to introduce additional evidence under O.8 rule 8 RSC. The Court said the evidence was relevant and of sufficient weight that it might have influenced the decision of the trial judge. But in Blehein v Murphy [2000] 2 IR 231, Denham J reiterated that only in exceptional circumstances would an appellant be allowed to amend a notice of appeal to include a ground not argued in the High Court. hacksawjim God of Diamondsit was good info... just long... my compliment was sincere.
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Sept 1, 2011 9:23:38 GMT -5
John Winston Lennon o'Boggie God of Diamonds
You are a good guy Hack...
|
|
|
Post by John Winston Lennon O'Boogie on Sept 1, 2011 10:04:27 GMT -5
ishmel God of Diamonds Re: ***Rumor Discussion Thread*** « Reply #363 Today at 6:05am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What a shocker. Rule 08 doesn't exist! I'm tearing up right now. This is funny. Only time new evidence can be shown in higher courts is 1. After the final decision is first issued base on information from the lower courts only. 2. Has to challenge the constitutionality of the final decision 3. Has to be considered by all members of the SC. Stop laughing at yourself..... www.law.cornell.edu/rules/supct/index.html
|
|
|
Post by ishmel on Sept 1, 2011 13:32:16 GMT -5
ishmel God of Diamonds Re: ***Rumor Discussion Thread*** « Reply #363 Today at 6:05am » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What a shocker. Rule 08 doesn't exist! I'm tearing up right now. This is funny. Only time new evidence can be shown in higher courts is 1. After the final decision is first issued base on information from the lower courts only. 2. Has to challenge the constitutionality of the final decision 3. Has to be considered by all members of the SC. Stop laughing at yourself..... www.law.cornell.edu/rules/supct/index.htmlWhich is Rule 8. Disbarment and Disciplinary Action 1. Whenever a member of the Bar of this Court has been disbarred or suspended from practice in any court of record, or has engaged in conduct unbecoming a member of the Bar of this Court, the Court will enter an order suspending that member from practice before this Court and affording the member an opportunity to show cause, within 40 days, why a disbarment order should not be entered. Upon response, or if no response is timely filed, the Court will enter an appropriate order. 2. After reasonable notice and an opportunity to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken, and after a hearing if material facts are in dispute, the Court may take any appropriate disciplinary action against any attorney who is admitted to practice before it for conduct unbecoming a member of the Bar or for failure to comply with these Rules or any Rule or order of the Court.
So what does this have to do with submitting new evidence in a Supreme Court? ;D pwned
|
|
|
Post by John Winston Lennon O'Boogie on Sept 1, 2011 13:59:55 GMT -5
Which is Rule 8. Disbarment and Disciplinary Action 1. Whenever a member of the Bar of this Court has been disbarred or suspended from practice in any court of record, or has engaged in conduct unbecoming a member of the Bar of this Court, the Court will enter an order suspending that member from practice before this Court and affording the member an opportunity to show cause, within 40 days, why a disbarment order should not be entered. Upon response, or if no response is timely filed, the Court will enter an appropriate order. 2. After reasonable notice and an opportunity to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken, and after a hearing if material facts are in dispute, the Court may take any appropriate disciplinary action against any attorney who is admitted to practice before it for conduct unbecoming a member of the Bar or for failure to comply with these Rules or any Rule or order of the Court.
So what does this have to do with submitting new evidence in a Supreme Court? ;D pwned That's just it, I keep telling you that, I think he won't need the SC... STOP HARASSING ME, PLEASE... ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by hacksawjim on Sept 1, 2011 16:05:07 GMT -5
You are a good guy Hack... unsubstantiated rumour.
|
|
|
Post by tracer25 on Sept 1, 2011 16:15:56 GMT -5
This bickering back and forth has got me all hot and bothered. Thanks!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2011 17:22:17 GMT -5
What bickering? D4E
|
|
flyfishfanatic
Dr. Of Diamonds
"Learn to swim, see you down in Arizona bay"
Posts: 169
|
Post by flyfishfanatic on Sept 2, 2011 9:54:06 GMT -5
Anymore made up stories for me to tear apart today? Batting 100% this week. Lets keep it going. ...you bat 1,000.....not %100...
|
|
|
Post by Display Name on Sept 2, 2011 10:03:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by cmkxerlong on Sept 2, 2011 10:45:36 GMT -5
Not a lawyer but this is what I got from wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppealIn some rare cases, an appellant may successfully argue that the law under which the lower decision was rendered was unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, or may convince the higher court to order a new trial on the basis that evidence earlier sought was concealed or only recently discovered. In the case of new evidence, there must be a high probability that its presence or absence would have made a material difference in the trial. Another issue suitable for appeal in criminal cases is effective assistance of counsel. If a defendant has been convicted and can prove that his lawyer did not adequately handle his case and that there is a reasonable probability that the result of the trial would have been different had the lawyer given competent representation, he is entitled to a new trial
|
|
|
Post by TallyHo on Sept 2, 2011 11:06:19 GMT -5
Anymore made up stories for me to tear apart today? Batting 100% this week. Lets keep it going. ...you bat 1,000.....not %100... Actually it's 1.000 not 1,000. Therefore you are both wrong. The term might be batting One-Thousand, but it is written with a (.) not a (,). So.......who's the winner now!??!?!?!?!?! TallyHo is the winner!!! Winner winner, chicken dinner!!
|
|
|
Post by sunbeam777 on Sept 2, 2011 11:50:12 GMT -5
Mona Lisa Smiles: (11:19 AM) richy_63: something is going on this weekend
(11:20 AM) richy_63: was told to watch for a buzz for us so the to contact was saying
11:21 AM) richy_63: toronto (11:21 AM) Floridanative: what's happening in toronto richy?
(11:21 AM) Floridanative: missed it (11:21 AM) richy_63: florida ga
(11:22 AM) richy_63: and just what i printed would not give details
|
|
|
Post by sunbeam777 on Sept 2, 2011 12:03:50 GMT -5
By: klonopin2mg 02 Sep 2011, 12:57 PM EDT (Reply to 1035263 by rosencrantz2010) rosencrantz2010 nothing to really report other than the line is open... i didn't ask to much of Tyler "this time"...i have no questions, i'll await word. on one of my visits to The Great State of Texas i was treated to a long converstion from the horses mouth that has left a lingering bad taste in mine for five years after being lied to (or the truth still in hiding). i thought this was over in 2006, early 2007 without a doubt...yet here we are that said, i still believe 100% in "The Good Outcome" and to "extract" maximum value even though i have not one bit of greed. i want nothing more or less than ever penny "extracted" from those who are corrupted and i don't give a d*mn who gets the spoils as long as it goes to those who will actually help in a crisis and make changes for the betterment of all. way to much unnecessary suffering, it makes me sick to my stomach to think about.. sorry to bore you with a response without "facts", but i don't think many will get facts from the hotline that will be of any substance. anywho...CHEERS!! Enjoy The Weekend! and the week after ) ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=CMKI&read=1035271
|
|
|
Post by georgie18 on Sept 2, 2011 12:07:21 GMT -5
ishmel God of DiamondsIf insiders wanted to let you know what was going on they would call you....and your sources like my sources have not been able to pinpoint the answers that we are all searching for. Hodges stated from day one if need be he would take this to the Supreme Court so that should not surprise you either. How do you define broke....One can transfer all their belonging to their children and 5 years later they can be considered broke...on paper that is...you will never find out if the man is broke...not even if he tells you himself..this is coming from a person that has been around the block many times.. You're right Georgie, Hodges did say that he would take it to the Supreme Court if needed. Makes my question moot with that said. I don't care what Hodge's personal financial issues are or how they became. I do however, consider our interest with somebody who's broke & can't pay their bills. Not to suggest that Hodge's is. I'm trying to find out. I was personally took back when I witnessed a highly respected board moderator amongst others; post Hodges office information in response to inquiries of posters wanting to make donations to him. Also Georgie, you're one of the few I consider to have a few brain cells left to comprehend reality. Now listen, if Hodges is appealing to the USSC, he's only appealing the decision issued in the lower courts. The USSC will take NOTHING else into consideration. What conclusion does this lead you to? Do you believe Hodges is able to over turn this decision? How? JWLOB, feel free to take a whack at it as well. It will do some good for you. Right, your question is moot!If you don't care about the financial status of Mr. Hodges then why ask Port if he is broke...which one is it...do you care or you don't...your double talking...I offered him a donation with no response...maybe his situation is better than you have been led to believe... Ish I am able to sleep well now knowing that you have such a high regard for my cerebral capacity...coming from a well rounded individual with so many life experiences it is really an honor... By the way research what can happen before you speak...don't play a high priced lawyer...your not...better for you to figure out why the judge has delayed his decision...
|
|