The 1958 United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention) is viewed by many as one of the most (if not the most) successful commercial treaties to which the United States has become a party.
The problem is that if Schindler had been in propria persona, his own statements in a pleading, however inartfully pleaded, would be given reasonable leeway by a court. (See Haines v. Kerner, 404 US 520 (1971)) Was he better-off being nominally represented by a top-notch firm which gave him utter freedom in creating the content of a Petition for the Supreme Court, given that under Rule 14.4, the failure of a petitioner to present "with accuracy, brevity, and clarity whatever is essential to ready and adequate understanding of the points requiring consideration" is sufficient reason for the Court to deny a Petition?
It sometimes happens that, despite the best efforts of all participants, negotiations grind to a stubborn halt and disappointment sets in. Before packing your bags, ask yourself these five questions. Your answer might be just the spark needed to rekindle talks.
The SEC’s National Exam Program Risk Alert, "Cybersecurity Examination Sweep Summary" reviews the cybersecurity practices and policies of 57 registered broker-dealers, and 49 registered investment advisers, and confirms that the Commission views cybersecurity risks as a high priority for the nation’s financial institutions. It is likely that other financial regulators will take a similar view. Accordingly, cybersecurity risk managers at financial institutions are well-advised to review the findings and proactively asses how their current practices rank.
The omission of a serious Lackey discussion in Jones is more than a drafting mistake in which a clerk went from statement of the problem to remedy while omitting a few logical steps in-between, or a skylark theory cooked up posthaste in a seminar atmosphere. It is a judicial failure when a major opinion fails to chart the past attempts of legal giants such as Justice Stevens to deal with a clearly framed issue. The Jones evasion creates a mere uncredited palimpsest of great arguments past which must be squarely dealt with in any serious discussion of the death penalty.
Defense counsel and certain courts have employed a new tactic to thwart class actions at the pleading stage – the motion to strike class allegations. But does this new tactic have any basis in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or is it a fabricated conflation of procedures? On close examination, the low spark of this new motion is clear.