The whole point of purchasing judgments on Judgment Marketplace is to earn a profit. How, exactly, do you make money when you buy judgments? People often have concerns about how they are going to collect on judgments when the original person (who they bought the judgment from) was unable to collect. There are a couple of options that allow you to overcome this challenge.. Tap Into the Judgment Collection Network. One of the resources that you have access to when purchasing judgments is the Judgment Collection Network. This is the part of Judgment Marketplace that consists of professionals who specialize in collecting judgments. They are experienced law firms and collection agencies that do the work of collecting on your behalf.. You will be able to search under Collector Listings to find someone who can help you collect on a judgment. When you browse or buy judgments, you can look up the last known location of the debtor. You should use this information when searching the Collector Listings. A ...
Definition of Witheld judgment on DUI in the Legal Dictionary - by Free online English dictionary and encyclopedia. What is Witheld judgment on DUI? Meaning of Witheld judgment on DUI as a legal term. What does Witheld judgment on DUI mean in law?
You extend the benefits of your judgment to an ally. Prerequisite: Second judgment class feature.. Benefit: You can pronounce a single judgment and extend its effects to one adjacent ally instead of pronouncing a second judgment. Similarly, once you have the third judgment class feature, you can pronounce a single judgment and extend its effects to two adjacent allies instead of pronouncing a second and third judgment. Alternatively, once you have the third judgment class feature, you can pronounce two judgments and extend the effects of one judgment to one adjacent ally instead of pronouncing a third judgment. Once an ally has gained the effects of your judgment, he need not remain adjacent to you to continue gaining that benefit. You can spend a free action to end this benefit for one or both allies. If your judgment bonus is suspended for you, it is suspended for all allies, but when it resumes, it does so for all allies.. ...
To understand how a person can so easily change the foundation of knowledge and belief for events after receiving new information, three cognitive models of hindsight bias have been reviewed.[20] The three models are SARA (Selective Activation and Reconstructive Anchoring), RAFT (Reconstruction After Feedback with Take the best) and CMT (Causal Model Theory). SARA and RAFT focus on distortions or changes in a memory process, while CMT focuses on probability judgments of hindsight bias.. The SARA model, created by Rüdiger Pohl and associates, explains hindsight bias for descriptive information in memory and hypothetical situations.[20][21] SARA assumes that people have a set of images to draw their memories from. They suffer from the hindsight bias due to selective activation or biased sampling of that set of images. Basically, people only remember small, select amounts of information-and when asked to recall it later, use that biased image to support their own opinions about the situation. The ...
Here, we combined a perceptual decision task and an auction procedure inspired by behavioral economics (37, 38) to investigate how monetary incentives influence confidence. In addition to replicating important statistical features common to most of the dominant models of confidence formation (43), we reveal and dissociate two effects of monetary incentives on confidence accuracy.. The first effect is a motivational effect of incentives: In line with theories of rational decision-making and motivation, incentivizing confidence judgments improves metacognitive sensitivity. This means that high (or low) confidence is more closely associated with correct (or incorrect) decisions when confidence reports are incentivized, regardless of the valence or magnitude of the incentive. This extends a recent study reporting a similar effect of incentivization on discrimination (a measure closely related to sensitivity, assessing how confidence discriminates between correct and incorrect answers), but limited ...
Bob Gearys claim for a new moral majority is just one or two unelected Supreme Court Justices (Liberalism: the new moral majority, July 1).. Pope Francis visionary teaching includesthe following: Homosexuality is a sin, families begin when a man and a woman marry to procreate, and caring for the earth starts by first stopping abortion, which is murder.. Bobs (mine and many peoples) Catholic upbringing taught us these are never-changing moral truths: Loving our neighbors (not judging them) and caring for the poor. Correcting thenew moralpoverty Bob touts as a resurgence of liberalism is part of traditional Catholic teaching and Pope Francis vision.. On Judgment Day God will ask us what we did for Him; voting (or celebrating) conservatism or liberalism and what they claim is moral will not cut it.. Terry Duff, Garner. ...
Gino, F., J. Shang, and R. T. A. Croson. The Impact of Information from Similar or Different Advisors on Judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108, no. 2 (March 2009): 287-302 ...
A Mormon leader says the churchs culpability in a rash of gay suicides following an new anti-gay policy will be decided on judgment day.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA VIET ANH VO CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 16-15639 REBEKAH E. GEE, SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ET AL SECTION B(5) OPINION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION Before the court are Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, Declaratory Judgment, and Permanent Injunction (Rec. Doc. 84), Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Injunction(Rec. Plaintiffs Judgment, Doc. Motion Declaratory 91), for Judgment Memorandum Summary in and Permanent Opposition Judgment(Rec. Doc. to 89), Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, Declaratory Judgment and Permanent Injunction (Rec. Doc. 90), Reply in Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, Declaratory Judgment and Permanent Injunction (Rec. Doc. 94) and Notice of Changed Circumstances Regarding HB 439 (Rec. Doc. 95). For the reasons set forth below, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motions for Partial Summary ...
ORDER denying 12 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; granting 16 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The Clerk of Court is directed to issue judgment and close the case. Signed by Hon. Frank P. Geraci, Jr. on 6/3/21. (NNR)-CLERK TO FOLLOW UP- ...
The concept of judgment has occupied a place of special importance in the tradition of Western thought. In antiquity and especially in the Enlightenment, judgment served as the rubric under which Western thinkers struggled to come to terms with how the world of human concerns is constituted in thought and, perhaps more important, how humans call for timely and appropriate actions. Recently, judgment has again emerged as a highly contestatory site for philosophical, rhetorical, and cultural reflection and inquiry.This book puts into contact a variety of responses to the question of judgment in a postmodern age, seeking out the question of how, once solid ground is pulled out from underneath the position of the judge, one continues to tread judgment, to meet obligations while remaining afloat.The essays in this edited volume investigate judgment as a rhetorical problem to be discussed philosophically and examines the standards by which judgments are made and can be made in contemporary culture. ...
Judging two events in combination (A&B) as more probable than one of the events (A) is known as a conjunction fallacy. According to dual-process explanations of human judgment and decision making, the fallacy is due to the application of a heuristic, associative cognitive process. Avoiding the fallacy has been suggested to require the recruitment of a separate process that can apply normative rules. We investigated these assumptions using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) during conjunction tasks. Judgments, whether correct or not, engaged a network of brain regions identical to that engaged during similarity judgments. Avoidance of the conjunction fallacy additionally, and uniquely, involved a fronto-parietal network previously linked to supervisory, analytic control processes. The results lend credibility to the idea that incorrect probability judgments are the result of a representativeness heuristic that requires additional neurocognitive resources to avoid.. ...
This study explores the impact of motivation, cognitive resources and difficulty of processing on social judgment. We hypothesized and found all three variables influence the type of information used to render judgment. Only when the information was easy to process, cognitive resources were ample and motivation was high were subjects able to use difficult information as a basis for their judgment. Furthermore, contrary to the common notion that statistical information tends to be utilized when resources are high, we were able to show that subjects relied on statistical information when their motivation was low, the information was difficult to process and/or cognitive resources were limited. These results add to the growing body of evidence attesting that the contents of information as such do not affect the likelihood of their being made use of in judgment. Both base-rates and representativeness (heuristic) information seem to be used in accordance with their subjective relevance - when such ...
This introduces the symposium on judgment aggregation. The theory of judgment aggregation asks how several individuals judgments on some logically connected propositions can be aggregated into consistent collective judgments. The aim of this introduction is to show how ideas from the familiar theory of preference aggregation can be extended to this more general case. We first translate a proof of Arrows impossibility theorem into the new setting, so as to motivate some of the central concepts and conditions leading to analogous impossibilities, as discussed in the symposium. We then consider each of four possible escape-routes explored in the symposium.. ...
What does this mean for the enforcement of Indian judgments in the UAE?. Similarly, under the UAE Civil Procedure Code,4 foreign court judgments can be enforced by parties in the UAE courts if the originating foreign court also enforces UAE court judgments (i.e., there is reciprocation of judgment enforcement). Given the 2020 Declaration, and the fact Indian courts should now enforce UAE court judgments under the streamlined processes, parties can now provide evidence to the UAE courts that there is reciprocation of judgment enforcement, meaning that the parties should be permitted to enforce Indian court judgments in the UAE via the UAE enforcement courts.. Why is this important to the UAE and India and the business community?. The trade ties between the UAE and India are significant, with the two nations setting a trade target of US$100 billion for 2020. India is also the second largest trade partner of the UAE.5 Given the scale of trade between the two nations, the implementation of ...
2.1 The TTPA was enacted to streamline the process for resolving certain Trans-Tasman civil proceedings, minimise existing impediments to enforcing New Zealand judgments and implement the Trans-Tasman Agreement in Australian law. Part 7 of the TTPA provides the statutory scheme for the recognition and enforcement in Australia of New Zealand judgments.. 2.2 A New Zealand judgment that may be registered under the TTPA cannot be enforced in Australia unless it is registered (s 65 of the TTPA).. 2.3 Pursuant to s 67(5) of the TTPA and regulation 17 of the TTPR an application to register a judgment under the TTPA is to be commenced by filing a Form 5 - Notice to liable person of registration of a NZ judgment under the TTPA (as prescribed in Schedule 1 to the TTPR), providing a sealed or certified copy of the New Zealand judgment and paying the applicable filing fee. 2.4 An application must be made within 6 years after the day the judgment is given or, if there have been appeal proceedings against the ...
A plaintiff in a wrongful death action against the United States in which a judgment was entered for the plaintiff questioned the correctness of a settlement action since the amount paid to her did not include interest on the judgment.
This morning I came across Jared Spools article about the $300 Million Button.. To summarize, Jareds team worked on an ecommerce site that required a login/registration to complete the checkout process. They did some design research and found out this step was chasing away huge numbers of potential customers - first-time users were resistant to registering, and even repeat users frequently forgot their usernames and passwords, causing frustration. When they eliminated the registration requirement, sales increased by $300 million in the first year.. Well, duh, I thought. Registering with a new and possibly unknown site is a serious commitment for many people. Of course it would chase them away. If the designers were any good, they wouldnt have needed a research study to tell them that.. But then my personal B.S. detector went off. Wait a minute, I thought. Would I have done better in their shoes? Or am I falling prey to hindsight bias?. Hindsight bias is the human tendency to erroneously ...
On appeal, a divided Federal Circuit has reversed judgment - holding that the asserted claims are actually invalid as a matter of law as being directed toward ineligible subject matter under Section 101. Majority Opinion by Chief Judge Prost and joined by Judge Chen. Dissenting Opinion by Judge Newman.. The bulk of the case focuses on waiver of TCLs right to appeal - with the majority finding no waiver.. During the litigation, TCL moved for summary judgment of ineligibility. The district court denied that motion after finding that the patent was not directed toward an abstract idea. The case continued then continued to trial and judgment as noted above.. After being denied summary judgment, a moving party typically needs to take a couple of steps in order to preserve the argument for appeal. Preservation is necessary because the summary judgment motion is seen as effectively moot once trial starts, and so the party needs to make a post-trial renewed motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL) ...
Lets say John Doe owns a pit bull he hasnt trained very well. One day, Johns dog jumps the fence and mauls Jane Smiths dog, Fifi. Jane rushes Fifi to the vet and incurs $2,000 in vet bills.. Jane sues John Doe for $3,000 to compensate for the vet bills and pain and suffering. The judge agrees and orders John to pay the $3,000. This order is a judgment against John, and it is usually a matter of public record. If John does not pay the judgment, Jane can ask the court for remedy, which might include the court placing a lien on his assets, garnishing his wages or other actions.. There are different kinds of judgments. A default judgment, for example, occurs in favor of the plaintiff when the defendant fails to appear in court to defend himself or does not respond to a summons. A deficiency judgment occurs when the sale of a seized piece of property does not generate enough cash to pay the judgment and the court has to place a lien on more property. ...
AND TO DISMISS THIS ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE Pursuant to Section VI of the Final Judgment entered on March 14, 1950, as modified on November 14, 1997, the parties respectfully submit this motion to vacate the Final Judgment and to dismiss this action without prejudice. The Plaintiffs reasons for supporting the Motion are set forth in the Memorandum of the United States to be filed separately. ASCAP joins in this motion. As ASCAP has not reviewed the Memorandum of the United States, it cannot concur with that Memorandum. The parties are simultaneously filing a motion in United States v. American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, Civ. Action No. 41-1395, that requests that the Court enter the proposed Second Amended Final Judgment, which replaces the Amended Final Judgment dated March 14, 1950, and all amendments and modifications thereto. The proposed Second Amended Final Judgment incorporates the substantive provisions of the Final Judgment in this action (the Foreign Decree). By ...
The declaratory judgment is an important judicial remedy in modern New Zealand. It provides parties with a convenient means for the efficient and effective resolution of a range of disputes, without the need for further remedies. Examples under the Declaratory Judgments Act 1908 include disputes relating to the interpretation of public statutes and regulations as well as private agreements and other documents. A courts jurisdiction to issue a declaratory judgment is, however, much broader than under the 1908 Act. The declaratory judgment is regularly relied upon as a remedy in relation to judicial review of administrative action, as well as being used in tort, in relation to Treaty of Waitangi settlements and Māori land law, and all manner of legal contexts in between.. Despite the importance of the declaratory judgment, there is disagreement as to its current and potential scope, and there exists significant crossover in its jurisdictional sources, between the Declaratory Judgments Act 1908, ...
The judgment appears likely to make the enforcement of foreign court judgments in the UAE a quicker and less hazardous process than has been the case until now.. Historically, the UAE has been a challenging place in which to enforce foreign court judgments. This is principally because:. a) in the absence of an international treaty between the UAE and another country for the mutual recognition and enforcement of court judgments, the UAE courts invariably refuse to enforce foreign court judgments; and b) even if a treaty does exist, the ability of a party to challenge that judgment all the way to the Dubai Court of Cassation can typically lead to a long-winded, expensive and unpredictable enforcement process.. While the UAE has entered into standalone mutual enforcement treaties with a number of countries, including (among others) France, India and China, there are some notable exceptions where no treaty exists e.g. the USA, England, Germany and Russia.. However, under DIFC Law, the DIFC Courts ...
The judgment appears likely to make the enforcement of foreign court judgments in the UAE a quicker and less hazardous process than has been the case until now.. Historically, the UAE has been a challenging place in which to enforce foreign court judgments. This is principally because:. a) in the absence of an international treaty between the UAE and another country for the mutual recognition and enforcement of court judgments, the UAE courts invariably refuse to enforce foreign court judgments; and b) even if a treaty does exist, the ability of a party to challenge that judgment all the way to the Dubai Court of Cassation can typically lead to a long-winded, expensive and unpredictable enforcement process.. While the UAE has entered into standalone mutual enforcement treaties with a number of countries, including (among others) France, India and China, there are some notable exceptions where no treaty exists e.g. the USA, England, Germany and Russia.. However, under DIFC Law, the DIFC Courts ...
Judgment Marketplace does not guarantee that any listing posted for sale is a valid judgment or that said judgment remains unsatisfied. However, to the best of its abilities, and without accepting liability for its failure to do same, Judgment Marketplace does its best to minimize the likelihood of fraud or mistake by monitoring its listings. To that end, Judgment Marketplace will remove any listing that purports to sell a claim which does not seem like a valid judgment or seems invalid on the face of the document ...
Q: What does it mean to be judgement proof, and how do I know if I am? Thank you.. - Betty. Reply from DebtCollectionAnswers.com:. Great question Betty! Being judgment proof essentially means that you dont own any property that could be seized or attached by creditors. If you were sued, the creditor or collector might successfully get a judgment against you, but wouldnt really be able to go after your bank account or other property to get paid right away. (Property here doesnt mean just a home, but may include wages, a car, or other things you own.). Being judgment proof doesnt mean you cant be sued. Sometimes creditors will sue in order to get a judgment so they can try to collect in the future. In most states, judgments last a long time and can be renewed. ...
A judgment creditor is the party a money judgment is issued to and is entitled to enforcement of the judgment through liens, execution and levy. Simply put, the judgment creditor is the person who receives the money in a judgment ruling. During the trial, they are called the plaintiff although judgments such as attorney s fees may also be owed to the plaintiff s attorney.
THE Court of Appeal sitting in Akure, has fixed Wednesday June 16, 2021, for judgement on the appeal filed by the governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, in the October 20, 2020 Governorship Election, Mr Eyitayo Jegede. Jegede, who lost the governorship poll to Governor Rotimi Akeredolu, had challenged his electoral defeat before the Election Tribunal, saying the process which produced Akeredolu as the candidate of the All Progressives Congress, was illegal, among other grounds. The tribunal however dismissed his petition for lack of merit. Thereafter Jegede proceeded to the appellate court to challenge the tribunal judgement. It was gathered that after the counsels of the appellant and the defendants had addressed the court, the appellate court reserved its judgement a few days ago ...
Jozwik et al. (2016) tested the explanatory power of a feature-based model for similarity judgments (and for neural representation) that also included a number of shape features. As similarity judgments typically produce a fundamental distinction between animate and inanimate objects, the authors implicitly tested the role of shape features for animacy categorizations. The model contained 120 feature dimensions that were generated by human observers and included shape features (e.g., curved, cylindrical, spiky), but also object parts (e.g., horns, wings, hand/fingers; about two-thirds of the dimensions), objects (e.g., tree, waterfall, leaves), colors (e.g., green, brown, gray), materials/textures (e.g., fur, metallic, wet/water), and others. On a set of 96 images of familiar objects, the model predicted neural representation in IT with equal accuracy as a categorical labeling model, suggesting that those features serve as stepping stones toward a representation that emphasizes categorical ...
The question of cross-linguistic differences in color perception has a long and venerable history (e.g., refs. 3-14) and has been a cornerstone issue in the debate on whether and how much language shapes thinking (15). Previous studies have found cross-linguistic differences in subjective color similarity judgments and color confusability in memory (4, 5, 10, 12, 16). For example, if two colors are called by the same name in a language, speakers of that language will judge the two colors to be more similar and will be more likely to confuse them in memory compared with people whose language assigns different names to the two colors. These cross-linguistic differences develop early in children, and their emergence has been shown to coincide with the acquisition of color terms (17). Further, cross-linguistic differences in similarity judgments and recognition memory can be disrupted by direct verbal interference (13, 18) or by indirectly preventing subjects from using their normal naming ...
This study addressed the system-justifying function of compensatory judgments in person perception. We hypothesized that compensatory judgments of competence and warmth would create an illusion of equality, thereby fulfilling system-justifying motives in the economically unequal society. An experimental vignette study was conducted with 188 Japanese university students. Results indicated that evaluating target persons in a compensatory manner enhanced the perceived legitimacy of the current social system when participants were led to believe that a significant economic gap exists in Japan between the rich and the poor. This suggests that compensatory judgments serve to system justification through restoring the impaired belief in equality. We discussed the implications of our results for system justification theory and the literature on compensation effects in social judgments.
In law, a summary judgment (also judgment as a matter of law) is a judgment entered by a court for one party and against another party summarily, i.e., without a full trial. Such a judgment may be issued on the merits of an entire case, or on discrete issues in that case. In common-law systems, questions about what the law actually is in a particular case are decided by judges; in rare cases jury nullification of the law may act to contravene or complement the instructions or orders of the judge, or other officers of the court. A factfinder has to decide what the facts are and apply the law. In traditional common law the factfinder was a jury, but in many jurisdictions the judge now acts as the factfinder as well. It is the factfinder who decides what really happened, and it is the judge who applies the law to the facts as determined by the factfinder, whether directly or by giving instructions to the jury. In the absence of an award of summary judgment (or some type of pretrial dismissal), a ...
In law, a summary judgment (also judgment as a matter of law) is a judgment entered by a court for one party and against another party summarily, i.e., without a full trial. Such a judgment may be issued on the merits of an entire case, or on discrete issues in that case. In common-law systems, questions about what the law actually is in a particular case are decided by judges; in rare cases jury nullification of the law may act to contravene or complement the instructions or orders of the judge, or other officers of the court. A factfinder has to decide what the facts are and apply the law. In traditional common law the factfinder was a jury, but in many jurisdictions the judge now acts as the factfinder as well. It is the factfinder who decides what really happened, and it is the judge who applies the law to the facts as determined by the factfinder, whether directly or by giving instructions to the jury. In the absence of an award of summary judgment (or some type of pretrial dismissal), a ...
Abductive reasoning assigns special status to the explanatory power of a hypothesis. But how do people make explanatory judgments? Our study clarifies this issue by asking: (i) How does the explanatory power of a hypothesis cohere with other cognitive factors? (ii) How does probabilistic information affect explanatory judgments? In order to answer these questions, we conducted an experiment with 671 participants. Their task was to make judgments about a potentially explanatory hypothesis and its cognitive virtues. In the responses, we isolated three constructs: Explanatory Value, Rational Acceptability, and Entailment. Explanatory judgments strongly cohered with judgments of causal relevance and with a sense of understanding. Furthermore, we found that Explanatory Value was sensitive to manipulations of statistical relevance relations between hypothesis and evidence, but not to explicit information about the prior probability of the hypothesis. These results indicate that probabilistic ...
AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT WHEREAS, Plaintiff, United States of America, filed its Complaint on June 24, 2005, alleging Defendants violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, and Plaintiff and Defendant, by their respective attorneys, have consented to the entry of this Final Judgment without trial or adjudication of any issue of fact or law, and without this Final Judgment constituting any evidence against or admission by Defendant, or any other entity, as to any issue of fact or law; AND WHEREAS, Defendant agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Final Judgment pending its approval by the Court; AND WHEREAS, the essence of this Final Judgment is the prohibition of certain alleged information exchanging activities; NOW THEREFORE, before any testimony is taken, without trial or adjudication of any issue of fact or law, and upon consent of the parties, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: I. Jurisdiction This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of and the parties to this action. For ...
Taking the title of his book from Isaiah Berlins famous essay distinguishing a negative concept of liberty connoting lack of interference by others from a positive concept involving participation in the political realm, Samuel Fleischacker explores a third definition of liberty that lies between the first two. In Fleischackers view, Kant and Adam Smith think of liberty as a matter of acting on our capacity for judgment, thereby differing both from those who tie it to the satisfaction of our desires and those who translate it as action in accordance with reason or will. Integrating the thought of Kant and Smith, and developing his own stand through readings of the Critique of Judgment and The Wealth of Nations, Fleischacker shows how different acting on ones best judgment is from acting on ones desires--how, in particular, good judgment, as opposed to mere desire, can flourish only in favorable social and political conditions. At the same time, exercising judgment is something every ...
Anyone tempted to believe George Pell did what he was convicted of doing should read first the majority judgment of the Court of Appeal majority (Judgment), next the fuller transcript of the complainants allegations that is given in paras. 415-55 of the dissenting judgment (Dissent), and then the Wikipedia account (with numerous links) of Operation Midland. If you take this short tour, you will see the Judgment fall apart under your eyes. The Judgments sequencing (Falsity, Improbability, Impossibility) reverses the rational order of treatment. Its handling of Archbishop Pells alibi defence concludes abruptly in para. 143 by placing the onus of proof exactly where the law quoted in para. 142 says it cannot be: on the defence. Its construction of a five or six minute window of opportunity for the Archbishop to commit singularly vile offences against two thirteen-year-old boys, in the Priests Sacristy, has a similar incoherence thinly veiled behind an of course and an evasive taking the ...
Back to Main Page / Back to List of Rules. Rule 301. Judgments (1988) TEXT. The judgment of the court shall conform to the pleadings, the nature of the case proved and the verdict, if any, and shall be so framed as to give the party all the relief to which he may be entitled either in law or equity. Provided, that upon motion and reasonable notice the court may render judgment non obstante veredicto if a directed verdict would have been proper, and provided further that the court may, upon like motion and notice, disregard any jury finding on a question that has no support in the evidence. Only one final judgment shall be rendered in any cause except where it is otherwise specially provided by law. Judgment may, in a proper case, be given for or against one or more of several plaintiffs, and for or against one or more of several defendants or intervenors.. Amended by order of July 15, 1987, eff. Jan. 1, 1988.. ...
If there is a dispute about the amount owed for a judgment, records proving who has paid for what and how much will be very important. The history of a judgment is impossible to recreate from memory. Thats why it is important to keep contemporaneous records of transactions.. The court will have a copy of the judgment, and the parties should keep their copies too. The parties should also keep records of all other transactions related to the judgment. The parties should keep the receipt and/or a copy of the check when the creditor pays a cost that can be recovered from the debtor-such as attorney fees, if authorized, or the fee to apply for a writ of garnishment or a writ of execution, or the fee to serve the writ, or the fee paid to a garnishee. The parties should also keep the receipt and/or a copy of the check when the debtor or the debtors insurance provider pays an amount toward the judgment. Similarly, the parties should keep the receipt and/or a copy of the check when a garnishee ...
Peoples moods can influence moral judgment. Such influences may arise because moods affect moral emotion, or because moods affect moral thought. The present study provides evidence that, at least in the footbridge dilemma, moods affect moral thought. The results of two experiments are reported in which, after induction of positive, negative, or neutral moods and presentation of the footbridge scenario, participants were asked one of two differentially framed closing questions. In the active frame, participants were asked whether they would be active and push the man, making thoughts about pushing accessible; in the passive frame, they were asked whether they would be passive and not push the man, making thoughts about not pushing accessible. The results show that affective influences on moral judgment depended on participants decision frame. Compared to neutral moods, positive moods induced utilitarian responding--i.e., deciding to push--in the active decision frame, but induced
Downloadable! Recent research has emphasized emotions role in non-utilitarian judgments, but has not focused much on characteristics of subjects contributing to those judgments. The present article relates utilitarian judgment to individual disposition to experience various emotions. Study 1 first investigated the relationship among state emotions and utilitarian judgment. Diverse emotions were elicited during judgment: guilt, sadness, disgust, empathy, anger, and anxiety, etc. Using psychological scales, Study 2 found that trait emotions predict the extent of utilitarian judgments, especially trait anger, trait disgust, and trait empathy. Unlike previous research that designated emotions only as factors mitigating utilitarian judgment, this research shows that trait anger correlates positively with utilitarian judgment. On the other hand, disgust and empathy correlated negatively. Guilt and shame---though previous research argued that their absence increased utilitarian judgment---appear unrelated to
I recently moved from the quiet of the Blue Ridge Mountains to the high paced, traffic intense, N.VA area. Ive been aware of my judgments since landing. To help ground me during this transition, Ive taken 3 yoga classes, all different from the style Im used to. Ive been aware of my judgments during these yoga classes- they play music here (darn), they have mirrors on the wall (uggh), they have hard wood floors (ouch). The yoga classes have been a good way for me to bring my awareness to my judgments. Its a safe place to allow my judgments to surface so I can be aware of them and then (hopefully) let them go.. Ive also been aware of some of my judgments as my partner and I move my things to make a new home. I dont like my dresser there, my meditation area is too small, the dishes are too high in the cabinet, there are too many nick-nacks in the living room. Other judgments are less conscious and Im only aware of them once my partner does something that makes it more noticeable.. I could ...
A Business Lesson in Moral Judgment from Unlikely Source - A Lesson in Moral Judgment By Professor Jill Gabrielle Klein author of We Got the Water: Tracing My Familys Path through Auschwitz I teach moral judgment at Melbourne Business School in...
From colleagues at Jindal Global Law School in India, this Call for Participation:. The Feminist Judgment Project India imagines the possibilities of collaborative writing of alternate judgments for several Indian cases across a broad range of legal issues having a significant bearing on women. At the heart of the project are a set of basic questions-can one formulate a distinctively feminist judicial practice? If so, what are the limitations to that approach? In what manner does this approach differ from the common law approach the court takes? Neither the practice of academic rewriting of judgment is new, nor is specifically the practice of feminist rewriting of judgments. The Feminist Judgment Project India borrows from the sister projects in Canada, UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and USA where feminist academics, lawyers, activists have written alternate versions of judgments originally authored by judges. * * *. The India project too will serve as a shadow judgment writing project by ...
The Iowa Supreme Court has ruled in a Story County case that a deferred judgment is considered a conviction. Deng Kon Tong pled guilty to a felony second-degree burglary charge in February of 2009, and was given a deferred judgment and three years probation.. The deferred judgment would give him the chance to wipe the charge from his record if he successfully completed the probation. In December of 2009 Tong was arrested carrying a sawed-off shotgun and charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm. A jury found him guilty of the firearm possession charge and he was sentenced to up to five years in jail.. Tong moved to have the firearm charge dismissed saying the deferred judgment on the burglary charge could not be considered a felony conviction. The district an appeals court ruled the deferred judgment could be considered a conviction on the felony charge.. The Iowa Supreme Court ruled that it believes the legislature intended a conviction to include a deferred judgment where the ...
Two leading questions can now be formulated. First, what bearing does the transcendental schematism of the categories have on the transcendental doctrine of the judgment? As we saw in passing in Section 1, schemata are products of the faculty of imagination, and more specifically, they are supplementary rules for interpreting general conceptual rules in terms of more specific figural spatiotemporal forms and sensory images. Schemata are needed by Kant in order to overcome two apparent gaps: an ontological gap between abstract universals and concrete particulars on the one hand, and a cognitive gap between concepts and intuitions on the other hand. This holds not only at the level of empirical judgment, where the cognitive gap is between the conceptual (attributive or descriptive) parts of the judgment on the one hand and the intuitional (directly referential) parts of the judgment on the other, but also at the transcendental level, where the gap is between pure concepts or categories on the one ...
This course will be an overview of: The Center for Audit Qualitys new guide, Professional Judgment Resource. Common potential judgment tendencies, traps, and biases. Strategies to avoid potential judgment tendencies and traps and to mitigate possible biases. Guidelines pertaining to the documentation of an auditors decision-making process. The successful completion of this course will result in the award of 1-2 CPE credits.
Downloadable! A field study performed at the end of multiday hospital stays investigated trend effects on retrospective global judgments of emotions. Subjects (43 women and 50 men) reported instances of their positive and negative emotions, retrospective global judgments of these emotions, and satisfaction with hospital services. Retrospective global judgments of positive and negative emotions were a positive function of the increase or decrease of the instances of emotions over time. Consistent with predictions based on the literature on gender differences in information processing, mens retrospective judgments of positive emotions were highly sensitive to trend effects but no trend effect was found for negative emotions. In contrast, women demonstrated trend effects primarily in judgments of negative emotions. Trends in positive and negative emotions, however, did not significantly contribute to satisfaction judgements for men and women. Theoretical and managerial implications of the results are
Jesus spoke of the judgement day when he walked among men. He said Every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of Judgement Matthew 12:36. He that rejecteth me and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him. The word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day John 12:48. Jesus spoke of a day of judgement on the last day. He said that two kinds of words were important: what we say and what he said. We will be judged by his words and by our words. This means that we need to pay attention to what we say and to what he says in the Bible. But how can we be sure that there really will be a day of Judgement? We can be sure there is a judgement because he proved there would be a Judgement by his own resurrection from the dead. The apostle Paul said, God now commandeth all men everywhere to repent because he hath appointed a day in the which he will judge the world by righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained, whereof he hath given ...
Much recent research has sought to uncover the gender difference in neural mechanism of moral judgment; however, very few researches study the neural gender differences in a specific area of moral judgment. The aim of this functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study was to examine possible gender difference in neural response to (sexual) disgusting pictures versus neutral pictures. Seventeen participants (9 males) were scanned while viewing pictures of tactile intimacy in same-sex and being asked to evaluate whether the behaviors between the stimulus persons in the pictures were morally appropriate or not. Both the neural responses to pictures of tactile intimacy in same-sex between male participants and female participants and the neural response to pictures of male-male tactile intimacy and to pictures of female-female tactile intimacy were examined. The results showed that significantly increased differential activations to the disgusting pictures relative to the neutral pictures were observed
Why is this stuff important? First and foremost is that, in New York, interest doesnt start to run until there is a judgment (unlike many other states where interest runs from the date of the accident). With interest running, at a statutory rate of 9%, the defense benefits of stalling quickly exact a price for a tactic that shouldnt exist at all.. Summary judgment also potentially removes the need for an expert (depending on the facts).. Most importantly, though, it sharply delineates the issues that need to be resolved by a jury. If the liability of one side can be established as a matter of law, why should a trial take place on those issues? Why would a court want to further drag out and complicate the litigation?. The Second Department is arguing, wrongly I think, that in order to have summary judgment on liability in must be complete and total on all liability issues. But why should partial summary judgment on some liability issues not be available to litigants? Isnt it part of the ...
This work was originally issued as a two-volume set, published in 1987 and 1988. It constitutes the definitive presentation of the system of classifying moral judgment built up by Lawrence Kohlberg and his associates over a period of twenty years. Researchers in human development and education around the world, many of whom have worked with interim versions of the system - indeed, all those seriously interested in understanding the development of moral judgment - will find it a useful and accessible resource. Volume 1 reviews Kohlbergs stage theory, and the large body of research on the significance and utility of his moral stages. Issues of reliability and validity are addressed. The volume ends with detailed instructions for using the reference sections, which are presented in volume 2.
Abstract Abstract:. In short-fiction pieces by Raymond Carver, Jorge Luis Borges, and Nathan Englander we continually find characters telling stories in order to influence other characters moral judgment. Drawing on the work of Alasdair MacIntyre, Paul Ricoeur, and Peter Goldie, I demonstrate how narration accomplishes such an impact on judgment by working through the functions of narrative identity, ultimately serving to direct our empathy and to complicate our application of principles. The stories here considered illustrate the centrality of narrative in moral reflection, in the sense that certain configurations of narrative may have the effect of unhinging our moral presumptions.. ...
Veil-of-Ignorance Reasoning Mitigates Self-Serving Bias in Resource Allocation During the COVID-19 Crisis By: Karen Huang, Regan Bernhard, Netta Barak-Corren, Max Bazerman and Joshua D. Greene ...
Doha, Qatar)--Omar Al Shaheen knows that success in championship pool is as much about perseverance as it is about being an amazing shot maker. Sometimes, when things arent going your way, you just have to be patient. When your time finally does come, you have to be ready to g ...
Put generally: all judgements are relative to culture is a judgement, call it (J). We may now construct a dilemma: Is the truth of (J) relative to a culture? If the answer is yes, then, since (J) is relative to a culture, (J) is not universally or absolutely true. If it is not absolutely true that all judgements are relative to culture, the possibility that there are judgements true independently of culture is not closed and (J) may be absolutely true. If the answer is no, then (J) is a case of a true judgement not itself relative to culture. The existence of one case opens the possibility of a class of such judgements. Thus the very attempt to formulate (J) opens rather than closes what it tries to forbid. Thus cultural relativism fatally affects its own assertion: it cannot be coherently formulated. To say that values are relative to cultures confuses culture with value. Values are used to measure cultures, including the culture that gives birth to them. If values cannot transcend cultures ...
20-10-23 Epic Games Re... by Florian Mueller. In order to eliminate the risk of punitive damages, Epic seeks to limit the dispute with Apple to an antitrust case if Epic wins and a contract dispute in case Epics antitrust claims dont succeed. For that purpose, Epic brought a motion for judgment on the pleadings (somewhere between a motion to dismiss and a motion for summary judgment) against Apples non-contract counterclaims, which Apple opposes. Late on Friday, Epic filed the above reply brief in support of that motion.. Philosophically, Epic Games v. Apple is in no small part about the relative value of the contribution each party makes to, for instance, Fortnites commercial success on iOS. While its obvious that there wouldnt be a Fortnite on iOS without Epic or without Apple, either partys counsel is now trying to convince the court that their respective client is the more important contributor. And that leads them to paint a self-centric picture.. Last month I agreed with famous and ...
Which rules for aggregating judgments on logically connected propositions are manipulable and which not? In this paper, we introduce a preference-free concept of non-manipulability and contrast it with a preference-theoretic concept of strategy-proofness. We characterize all non-manipulable and all strategy-proof judgment aggregation rules and prove an impossibility theorem similar to the Gibbard--Satterthwaite theorem. We also discuss weaker forms of non-manipulability and strategy-proofness. Comparing two frequently discussed aggregation rules, we show that conclusion-based voting is less vulnerable to manipulation than premise-based voting, which is strategy-proof only for reason-oriented individuals. Surprisingly, for outcome-oriented individuals, the two rules are strategically equivalent, generating identical judgments in equilibrium. Our results introduce game-theoretic considerations into judgment aggregation and have implications for debates on deliberative democracy.. ...
Pneumonia is often diagnosed and treated empirically. We set out to determine the diagnostic accuracy of clinical judgment based on signs and symptoms to detect radiographic pneumonia in patients presenting with acute cough in primary care. In 2810 European patients with acute cough, general practitioners (GPs) recorded whether they considered pneumonia to be present (yes or no) immediately after history and physical examination. Chest radiography was performed within 1 week by local radiologists blind to other patient characteristics. 140 patients had radiographic pneumonia (5%), of whom 41 (29%) had been diagnosed as such. 31 (1%) patients had a clinical diagnosis that was not confirmed by radiography (n=2670). In clinically suspected pneumonia, 57% of subjects were subsequently diagnosed with radiographic pneumonia. Negative predictive value (NPV), sensitivity and specificity of GPs clinical judgment were 96%, 29% and 99%, respectively. Compared to patients with a clinical diagnosis of pneumonia
Queensland Law Society (QLS) is a party to protocols with all courts whereby the Society, on behalf of its members, can approach the court where there has been undue delay in delivering a judgment. For the Queensland courts there is a court protocol that reserved judgments should be delivered within three months.. An advantage of this process, over contacting the court yourself, is that the judge will not know which party has been chasing the judgment. The Supreme Court of Queensland has placed this notice on the Courts website.. For the Federal Circuit Court, where a reserved judgment has not been delivered within three months of the completed hearing or written submissions, represented parties may contact the President of the Society or the Bar Association of Queensland, who will write to the Chief Judge. Self-represented litigants should write directly to the Chief Judge.. QLS members will be assured of anonymity and the request will be treated in confidence. The Chief Judge will put in ...
The test list contained the original 80 words (targets) randomly intermixed with 16 additional new words (lures). Thus, we had a new/old ratio of 1:5, a ratio that allowed us to obtain a large number of trials of interest (cf. Smith et al., 2011). During test, each trial began with a 300-msec fixation cross, followed by the presentation of one word for 2 sec, after which a response prompt appeared (depicted in Figure 1), indicating the participants to report, using the computer keyboard, their recognition judgment (old/new) concurrently with their confidence level (for each response type, 1-4, where 1 = least confident responses and 4 = most confident responses; see Figure 1). If the participants made an old judgment, they were subsequently prompted to make an RKG judgment, as described by Gardiner and Parkin (1990). Note that participants were instructed to respond R only if their recognition judgment was accompanied by a subjective reexperiencing of context details from the study ...
By Viorica Mirela Ștefan-Duicu and Adrian Ștefan-Duicu; Delimitations of the Professional Judgment within an Economic Environment
Question:. Dear Steve,. About 10 yrs ago, my son stole my credit cards and maxed them out..I could not pay them, but was able to pay what I could..sometimes min amt due and sometimes not... Anyway, I got papers to go to court because I was being sued..My son said he would go to court and tell the Judge it was he to ran up those accounts and not me..He never went to Court and I was in default and giving a Judgement..I did not know this until I got a letter from the Lawyer saying they now have a lean on my house... At one time I did meet with the lawyers and he told me they would never collect this judgement since my only income is my SS and a small pension from my company..Most companies have written me off..I have new credit now with my score at 680 and current on my bills, what I worry about is this judgement..At 76 yrs old, I dont want to be thrown out of my house... I am a Widow so my house is to pass on to my son and family..will be Judgement end when I die? I live in DuPage County in ...
Senator Adeyeye in a statement said, The judgement of the tribunal today(yesterday) is not short of open robbery and a direct assault on the integrity of the Nigerian judiciary.. The whole world know that the Senatorial election of February 23rd was the freest and fairest in the history of our state. No doubt the judgement was purchased. And upon proper scrutiny the filthy lucre that influenced it will be revealed.. Senate ex-deputy whip floors PDP at tribunal as House of Representatives member retains seat(Opens in a new browser tab). The judges shamelessly contradicted themselves throughout the judgement. They went to great lengths to reach a conclusion that did not follow from the premise with jaundiced and twisted logic.. To the teeming masses of Ekiti south whose vote the tribunal is trying to steal for Olujimi , they should be rest assured that the judgement will not stand. I have instructed my lawyers to immediately proceed on appeal. And by the grace of almighty God we shall have ...
Austen-Smith, D., Banks, J. (1996) Information Aggregation, Rationality, and the Condorcet Jury Theorem, American Political Science Review 90: 34�45. Bovens, L., Rabinowicz, W. (2006) Democratic answers to complex questions: an epistemic perspective, Synthese 150(1): 131-153. Bozbay, I., Dietrich, F., Peters, H. (2011) Judgment aggregation in search for the truth,working paper, London School of Economics. Condorcet, Marquis, D. (1785) Essai sur l�application de l�analyse á la probabilité des décisions rendues á la pluralité des voix. Dietrich, F. (2006a) Judgment aggregation: (im)possibility theorems, Journal of Economic Theory 126(1): 286-298. Dietrich, F. (2006b) General representation of epistemically optimal procedures, Social Choice and Welfare 26(2): 263-283. Dietrich, F. (2010) The possibility of judgment aggregation on agendas with subjunctive implications, Journal of Economic Theory 145(2): 603-638. Dietrich, F., List, C. (2007a) Arrow�s theorem in judgment aggregation, ...
This week, the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota issued a 39-page order granting summary judgment to the defense on loss causation grounds. On the basis of the courts loss causation analysis, the court dismissed all of the remaining claims in the case, which arose under Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the 1934 Act. The Courts ruling is significant because it provides a thorough review of loss causation principles as they apply at the summary judgment stage, as opposed to the pleading stage.. Several aspects of the Retek ruling are important for securities litigators grappling with loss causation issues at the summary judgment and trial phase of a securities case.. First, the Retek decision contains a thorough review of the law pertaining to the true financial condition theory and other indirect disclosure theories that plaintiffs are increasingly relying upon at the pleading and summary judgment stages of securities class actions. The Retek court notes that many courts have ...
Many times, parties to a lawsuit receive trial court rulings in the midst of the litigation that are unfavorable, oppressive, and seem to them to be demonstrably wrong. The parties want to appeal immediately, but their counsel will say that cannot happen, citing the Final Judgment Rule. The rule certainly sounds dark and fateful. Perhaps courts intend it to be, because the rule serves to deter disgruntled litigants from appealing while the trial court case is ongoing, and typically requires those litigants to wait months, or even years, to appeal. So what is this rule? And perhaps more importantly, what are ways to gain access to an appellate court early without offending it?. The Final Judgment Rule (sometimes called the One Final Judgment Rule) is the legal principle that appellate courts will only hear appeals from the final judgment in a case. A plaintiff or defendant cannot appeal rulings of the trial court while the case is still ongoing. For example, a party that loses its motion to ...
This months CLIP is an article by Pablo Ibáñez Colomo, Professor of Law at the London School of Economics, on the Court of Justices January 2020 judgment in Generics (Paroxetine). As we discussed here, the Generics judgment was significant because it was the first time that the EUs highest court provided guidance on the competition law assessment of pay-for-delay agreements in the pharma sector.. After providing a helpful summary of the case background and the Courts main findings, Professor Ibáñez Colomo argues that the judgment achieves an optimal balance that minimise[s] the risk of Type I (over-enforcement) and Type II (under-enforcement) errors. In his analysis, the judgment achieves this in two main ways. First, it defines the notion of potential competition relatively expansively (real and concrete possibility of market entry, as opposed to likelihood, is enough in this regard). In Professor Ibáñez Colomos opinion, this reduces the risk of Type II errors. Second, the ...
The word judgment (also spelled judgement) means making a decision carefully, after studying and comparing all evidence that is available. A judgment may be about what is the best thing to do, or how to do it, or how to classify something or someone, or what to think about something.. Judgment may differ according to the topic:. ...