Evidence

Displaying 81 - 90 of 123, sorted by most recent

form.antibot { display: none !important; } You must have JavaScript enabled to use this form.

Brady v. Maryland Material in the United States District Courts: Rules, Orders, and Policies

Laural L. Hooper, Shelia Thorpe

May 31, 2007

An update of Treatment of Brady v.

In Camera Ex Parte Protective Order

Garland E. Burrell Jr.

December 21, 2006

Order, United States v. Hayat, No. 2:05-cr-240 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2006), D.E. 446.

Exhibit 1 Stipulation and Order

Garland E. Burrell Jr.

February 3, 2006

Order, United States v. Hayat, No. 2:05-cr-240 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 3, 2006), D.E. 180.

2003-2004 District Court Case-Weighting Study: Final Report to the Subcommittee on Judicial Statistics of the Committee on Judicial Resources of the Judicial Conference of the United States

Carol L. Krafka, Patricia A. Lombard

January 1, 2005

Different types of cases impose different work demands on judges. Case weights are a measure of the average time consumed by cases of one type relative to other types.

Treatment of Brady v. Maryland Material in United States District and State Courts' Rules, Orders, and Policies

Laural L. Hooper, Jennifer Evans Marsh, Brian Yeh

October 1, 2004

The Center prepared this report at the request of the Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules as it considers whether to propose amendments to Rules 11 and 16 to codify the disclosure requirements in Brady v. Maryland.

Opinion Dismissing Case on State Secrets Grounds

Royce C. Lamberth

July 28, 2004

Opinion, Horn v. Huddle, No. 1:94-cv-1756 (D.D.C. July 28, 2004, refiled June 9, 2009), D.E. 380.

Manual for Complex Litigation, Fourth Edition

March 23, 2004

This work describes approaches that trial judges have found to be useful in managing complex cases.

Survey of Bankruptcy Judges Regarding Use of Rule 7026 Mandatory Disclosure in Adversary Proceedings

Robert J. Niemic, Shannon R. Wheatman

March 22, 2004

Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires each party to disclose to the other, at specified time intervals, a variety of information about their case.

Neutral Science Panels: Two Examples of Panels of Court-Appointed Experts in the Breast Implants Product Liability Litigation

Laural L. Hooper, Joe S. Cecil, Thomas E. Willging

June 15, 2001

This report to the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management describes two different types of independent panels used in the silicone gel breast implants litigation.

Order Appointing Psychologist — Western District of Missouri

May 18, 2001

Federal Judicial Center

You are here