Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
At the recent Annual Meeting of the Family Law Section of the New York State Bar Association, Justice Sondra Miller of the Appellate Division, Second Department, stated that the Matrimonial Commission, which she chairs, is now taking a close look at one of the more controversial topics in matrimonial litigation: the use of forensic experts. A survey on recent experiences with experts in matrimonial and family law proceedings revealed that the use of forensic experts in child custody cases is causing concern, not only in the judiciary, but in the mental health professions as well. In the past, many judges simply accepted with few, if any, questions the expert's opinion on what constitutes the best interests of a child. Now, with some prominent psychologists questioning whether their profession is equipped to address such an abstract and unscientific question as a child's best interests, judges are taking a more skeptical view. See Caher J: “Judge Smith Says Marriage 'Contract' Favors Women.” New York Law Journal, 1/28/05. It has thus become necessary to look back to the basics for deciphering just what constitutes an admissible expert opinion, and how to get that evidence admitted at trial.
Rules of Evidence
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.