USLawEssentials
USLawEssentials
  • 191
  • 6 739 068
Corporate Hijacking: USLawEssentials Law & Language Podcast:
Originally published July 10, 2021 this episode continues the USLawEssentials Law & Language Podcast What’s New in the Legal News series? This episode explores a defendant accused of “corporate hijacking” as part of a securities fraud scheme. Your hosts discuss the story of the defendant who allegedly misrepresented himself as a corporate officer of defunct companies and proceeded to ‘pump and dump’ company stock at an artificially inflated price.
Переглядів: 1 339

Відео

When the Judge gets Judged: Law & Language Podcast
Переглядів 8742 роки тому
What happens when a judge misbehaves in court? In episode 9 of the USLawEssentials Law & Language Podcast (originally published June 21, 2021) Stephen introduces a story from the American Bar Association Journal: Judge gets 6-month suspension, partly for misusing her contempt power. The judge who apparently abused her power in court finds herself being judged. Find out what happens as you impro...
Edwards v Vannoy
Переглядів 5042 роки тому
Originally published in May of 2021, this is Episode 3 of the USLawEssentials Law & Language Podcast. In this episode we continue the What's New in Legal News series. This time it's Daniel's turn and he introduces the Edwards v. Vannoy Supreme Court decision and its effect on the Constitutional requirement of unanimous jury verdicts in criminal cases. You can watch two videos discussing this de...
Does a Full House Reduce your Odds of Passing the Bar?
Переглядів 3772 роки тому
Episode 2 USLawEssentials Law & Language presents the What's New in Legal News series, where Stephen Horowitz and Daniel Edelson ask each other about legal news developments. Today it's Steve's turn and he introduces an interesting article about bar passage rates. Apparently, more people in a bar exam candidate's home reduces the chances that he or she will pass the bar! Hmmmm.....why would thi...
USLawEssentials Law & Language Podcast: Jones v. Mississippi
Переглядів 4612 роки тому
Episode 1 Originally published on May 28, 2021, in this podcast, your hosts, Daniel & Stephen, discuss part I of the Supreme Court's decision in Jones v. Mississippi. USLawEssentials offers two legal English and US law courses based on the Supreme Court's decision, which you can find here: uslawessentials.com/courses/jones-mississippi-i/ uslawessentials.com/courses/law-language-jvm/ You can lis...
What are the federal sentencing guidelines?
Переглядів 6 тис.2 роки тому
This video introduces the federal sentencing guidelines in the United States. The federal sentencing guidelines provide guidelines that federal judges consult when determining a sentence for a defendant convicted in federal court.
What are the three types of product liability claims?
Переглядів 5 тис.2 роки тому
This video introduces product liability claims based on manufacturing defect, design defect, and failure to warn.
What did the Supreme Court decide in Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L.?
Переглядів 8 тис.3 роки тому
This video introduces the recent Supreme Court decision holding that a school violated a student's constitutional rights by punishing her for a snapchat message that included a vulgar message.
What did the Supreme Court decide in Edwards v. Vannoy?
Переглядів 1,7 тис.3 роки тому
This case introduces the 2021 decision in Edwards v. Vannoy where the Supreme Court of the United States held that Ramos v. Louisiana does not apply retroactively to federal courts reviewing final state court convictions.
What is the series qualifier canon?
Переглядів 1,6 тис.3 роки тому
This video introduces the series qualifier canon, a principle of statutory interpretation in which a modifier or qualifier is presumed to apply to a series of nouns or verbs coming before the qualifier. We introduce how this principle was applied in the Supreme Court case, Facebook v. Duguid.
Why did SCOTUS affirm personal jurisdiction over defendant in Ford Motor Co. v. Montana 8th Dist Ct?
Переглядів 4 тис.3 роки тому
This video introduces how the Supreme Court analyzed specific personal jurisdiction over defendant in Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court The Court clarifies the meaning of personal jurisdiction arising out of, or relating to, defendant's contacts with the forum state.
What is the tort of false imprisonment?
Переглядів 13 тис.3 роки тому
This video introduces the intentional tort of false imprisonment where defendant confines plaintiff to an enclosed area without plaintiff's consent.
Why did the Supreme Court hold that Uzuegbunam v Preczewski was not moot?
Переглядів 1,6 тис.3 роки тому
This video introduces Uzuegbunam v Preczewski where SCOTUS held that $1 in nominal damages was sufficient to satisfy the requirement that a case be redressable and not moot.
What is 42 USC Section 1985?
Переглядів 4,5 тис.3 роки тому
Also known as the Civil Rights Act of 1871, this law was passed after the Civil War to criminalize conspiracies to deprive people of their civil rights through violence and intimidation.
Introduction to Outlining for Law Exam Essay Questions
Переглядів 1,7 тис.3 роки тому
Introduction to Outlining for Law Exam Essay Questions
What is Amendment XXV (25) of the United States Constitution?
Переглядів 1,8 тис.3 роки тому
What is Amendment XXV (25) of the United States Constitution?
Why did the Supreme Court reject the Texas v Pennsylvania lawsuit for lack of standing?
Переглядів 5 тис.3 роки тому
Why did the Supreme Court reject the Texas v Pennsylvania lawsuit for lack of standing?
Why is the Civil Lawsuit in George Floyd's case primarily based on the Fourth Amendment?
Переглядів 1,3 тис.3 роки тому
Why is the Civil Lawsuit in George Floyd's case primarily based on the Fourth Amendment?
What is restitution?
Переглядів 20 тис.3 роки тому
What is restitution?
What is supplemental jurisdiction
Переглядів 10 тис.3 роки тому
What is supplemental jurisdiction
What is a motion for reconsideration?
Переглядів 9 тис.3 роки тому
What is a motion for reconsideration?
What is a lesser included offense?
Переглядів 2,2 тис.3 роки тому
What is a lesser included offense?
What is Qualified Immunity?
Переглядів 15 тис.4 роки тому
What is Qualified Immunity?
What is proximate cause?
Переглядів 34 тис.4 роки тому
What is proximate cause?
What did the Supreme Court decide in Ramos v Louisiana?
Переглядів 4,3 тис.4 роки тому
What did the Supreme Court decide in Ramos v Louisiana?
What is a choice of law clause in a contract?
Переглядів 3,8 тис.4 роки тому
What is a choice of law clause in a contract?
What is the case or controversy clause?
Переглядів 3,8 тис.4 роки тому
What is the case or controversy clause?
What is a representation in a contract?
Переглядів 7 тис.4 роки тому
What is a representation in a contract?
What is the mistake of fact defense in a criminal case?
Переглядів 10 тис.4 роки тому
What is the mistake of fact defense in a criminal case?
What is the crime of attempt?
Переглядів 6 тис.4 роки тому
What is the crime of attempt?

КОМЕНТАРІ

  • @MurdaQ50
    @MurdaQ50 3 дні тому

    so i had tickets, i had zoom calls coming up, then that same day got scheduled as an expert, what does that mean

  • @JesUSking17
    @JesUSking17 3 дні тому

    Well done gentlemen. *nod*

  • @luciokeyboards
    @luciokeyboards 10 днів тому

    Here after dr. Disrespects tweet

  • @dominicc8332
    @dominicc8332 12 днів тому

    Yes yes, it all makes sense now. Bravo! Great work!

  • @NelmarSen
    @NelmarSen 14 днів тому

    0:50 wouldnt that be called a fee simple defeasable? glenda gave it to alexa under 1 condition

  • @askmshaymes
    @askmshaymes 14 днів тому

    Are you still responding to these chats via email?

  • @albertotorres321
    @albertotorres321 17 днів тому

    Muy bien muy útil que tengan un muy buen día

  • @lamar5803
    @lamar5803 21 день тому

    Great Education!

  • @filho4437
    @filho4437 26 днів тому

    Grand Jury's are more of a shield for the prosecutor than a defendant.

  • @truthfreedom8506
    @truthfreedom8506 Місяць тому

    What is the official commentary of the N.Y.U.C.C. called?

    • @USLawEssentials
      @USLawEssentials Місяць тому

      There are official comments to the UCC but I'm not aware of official state-specific comments.

  • @ez3333
    @ez3333 Місяць тому

    😇👍

  • @ez3333
    @ez3333 Місяць тому

    😇😂

  • @RajaMuzamal-ig5xe
    @RajaMuzamal-ig5xe Місяць тому

    Sexy dikhana full sex dikhana sexy dikhana full

  • @lakeishamcfall4833
    @lakeishamcfall4833 Місяць тому

    Great stuff and I have t taken civ pro yet!

  • @tracyhazelton1878
    @tracyhazelton1878 Місяць тому

    What can I do if the judge in circuit court has denied me due process? He is allowing the prosecutor to use recycled documents and holding me to a deferred prosecution agreement that I did not have any knowledge of or given a copy of until after the defense attorney had withdrawn from the case. I have tried to withdraw my plea and the judge refused the motion.

  • @marvinbrando722
    @marvinbrando722 Місяць тому

    It is basically a santa inquisition

  • @RowlandKolajo
    @RowlandKolajo Місяць тому

    thank you very much. 👌👍

  • @matthaytham1886
    @matthaytham1886 Місяць тому

    I FINALLY UNDERSTOOD WHAT INTERPLEADER IS! HOLY COW! Why is it needs to be English before being understood? Why wouldn't I get it with Filipino words? Thanks for the good animation

  • @YvetteWilliams-xm6vs
    @YvetteWilliams-xm6vs Місяць тому

    😢😂🎉❤

  • @omegaservices5909
    @omegaservices5909 Місяць тому

    Helpful

  • @Turalcar
    @Turalcar Місяць тому

    If David didn't see her enter the bank this can probably be objected to as speculation. If that's because Debbie told David she was going to the bank, this is hearsay but allowed under the "statement against interest" exception.

    • @USLawEssentials
      @USLawEssentials Місяць тому

      Remember, for an opposing party statement you don't need the declaration against interest hook. .

    • @Turalcar
      @Turalcar Місяць тому

      @@USLawEssentials I suppose they don't need the declaration because if one side brings it up it's almost by definition against the opposing party's interest.

    • @USLawEssentials
      @USLawEssentials Місяць тому

      @@Turalcar It's a little different. When you're dealing with a party you don't need the statement against interest. Please look at FRE 801(d)(2)

    • @Turalcar
      @Turalcar Місяць тому

      @@USLawEssentials Weird. So it's not even an exception. Just not hearsay

    • @USLawEssentials
      @USLawEssentials Місяць тому

      @@Turalcar Right.I think the hearsay rules get a little odd (IMHO) but the distinctions are important if you're taking a law school exam or a bar exam.

  • @jeffking8890
    @jeffking8890 Місяць тому

    The Supreme Court decisions in the 1920s cases of Fairchild v. Hughes and Frothingham v. Mellon were wrong as there is no concept to limit bring a case to just 3 requirements or even the term of “standing”. The Government can act without a Constitutional basis which the remedy will not be able to redress the grievance or grievances. Even the act of passing a law in Congress can create an injury to the States as the Legislature had no authority to pass a bill or act that was not already in its power. The Federal Government has passed too many laws, bills, and acts in contradiction to the powers that were reserved for the States.

  • @kiranshah8011
    @kiranshah8011 Місяць тому

    3 sister one brother one brother is expire after marrage his wife and two sons after expire his wife doing new marrage his mother inlow is only in his house three sister married now his mother is agree his properties is given three daughter hosekta hai please answer

  • @monkeybudge
    @monkeybudge Місяць тому

    A lot of Trump fans need to understand standing

  • @coolmom5572
    @coolmom5572 Місяць тому

    thanks for explaining clearly what to expect at a Discovery for average people.

  • @jasminehendricks8304
    @jasminehendricks8304 Місяць тому

    “Performance is the acceptance of the contract” couldn’t explained it any better!!

  • @yes-fy5gx
    @yes-fy5gx 2 місяці тому

    Shared or concurrent??

  • @johnwerner69
    @johnwerner69 2 місяці тому

    I'm here after i heard Kendrick say "and your homeboy need subpoena"

  • @prayenergy7376
    @prayenergy7376 2 місяці тому

    Lets say a Judge didn't get a mandatory certificate to deal with cases that had to do with "tieing your shoe", (just a hypothetical).... And the deffendent objects to a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Would the defendent be correct that the court doesn't have subject matter Jurisdiction because the Judge is not qualified by not having approved credentials?

  • @sevyn13
    @sevyn13 2 місяці тому

    Abolish it!

  • @eringrine9810
    @eringrine9810 2 місяці тому

    Awesome. Simple and straight to the point!

  • @maxkravchenko9837
    @maxkravchenko9837 2 місяці тому

    So good explained. Thanks.

  • @NarenDesai-dl9mr
    @NarenDesai-dl9mr 2 місяці тому

    How to email?

  • @CarlaReynolds-or3bp
    @CarlaReynolds-or3bp 2 місяці тому

    It has been 65 days. He has not answered the questions that was sent to him. How do I write it asking the judge to put sanctions on him for not responding?

  • @CarlaReynolds-or3bp
    @CarlaReynolds-or3bp 2 місяці тому

    How do you file a motion to compel answers to indirect Tory? Can you send me a sample on how I should write it in word if I would appreciate it. Thank you

  • @wm.h.9123
    @wm.h.9123 2 місяці тому

    @USLawEssentials bless you for these videos! Helped me with finals prep.

  • @ninirema4532
    @ninirema4532 2 місяці тому

    🙏

  • @-red3236
    @-red3236 2 місяці тому

    I’m pretty sure thats double jeopardy it’s still the same crime even if it’s not that same charge also if he was to get charged again it would probably be with manslaughter not murder and I don’t think the offense would be strong enough to actually find him guilty of manslaughter

  • @grimmtodd87
    @grimmtodd87 2 місяці тому

    Is an awards ceremony at school a limited public forum???

  • @MasterMind300
    @MasterMind300 2 місяці тому

    Great information.

  • @martawest6786
    @martawest6786 3 місяці тому

    Excellent examples with the biggest criminal of all, as is Donald Trump and family 😂

  • @thegoldenland
    @thegoldenland 3 місяці тому

    I just want to know how she proved David signed the contract?

  • @JonTrejo-fp9vx
    @JonTrejo-fp9vx 3 місяці тому

    Thank you.

  • @martythomasg
    @martythomasg 3 місяці тому

    It defies understanding that Cannon is still presiding over this case!

  • @grousemann
    @grousemann 3 місяці тому

    So if Peter Jumped out of the way and broke his leg would that still make Dudley responsible?

    • @USLawEssentials
      @USLawEssentials 3 місяці тому

      Great question. A court would probably ask, among other things, was D’s unreasonable actions the actual cause of P jumping out of the way and getting hurt? And is that a foreseeable injury that would result from this type of carelessness by D?

  • @Vikermajit
    @Vikermajit 3 місяці тому

    Thank you, sir.

  • @nishanttomar7826
    @nishanttomar7826 3 місяці тому

    very good 👍

  • @bryanbradley6871
    @bryanbradley6871 3 місяці тому

    unless youre John Ramsey and Pasty Ramsey 😂

  • @AdvocateImranPasha
    @AdvocateImranPasha 3 місяці тому

    Very short and sweetly explained😊👍

  • @NotSoBad20
    @NotSoBad20 3 місяці тому

    Nice simple to the point! Thank you kindly!