Video

I would appreciate if someone could answer my question. I am not a lawyer. I have a retaliation case against my employer ( Gov). My case is currently at EEOC waiting for the MSJ decision. During the time the defendant was writing his MSJ, another retaliation claim was filed against the same defendant. Both complaints are retaliation through nonselections. However, the nonselections were for two different positions ( same title, same grade, but two different hiring activity with two different job announcements). Does the rule of preclusion applies in this case. To be clear, my first claim has not been decided yet and it was at pre-hearing stage when I filed my second claim. At the moment, the second claim is pending for the employer's acceptance and investigation, and the first claim is pending MSJ decision. Thanks

Excellent for this non lawyer involved with a multi million dollar insurance action. Thank you.

Good video but you missed removal

My older brother told me this case, he is the class of th 70s

ahhh they dont provide scrap paper in the FL bar

Doesn't one need to make an affirmative act to withdraw from a conspiracy under federal law?

Love the simplicity of his example.

Whew. I love his videos.

I Now understand that I plead guilty in the wrong Court change the venue was granted would have been you changed to could you give me some laws awesome help in Alabama

In Alabama

Need help with murder case jurisdiction change of venue was granted but never went to court

This guy and his Paul Ryan tie is awesome

FiAT

What's the rule for joinding my foot with the ass of whoever wrote these rules?

Great information! Thank goodness for attorneys who don’t mind sharing knowledge and experience for us pro se and new attorneys 🙏🏾

Do you usually have music under your videos?

What if they have a final judgement but the stipulations on the judgment are inherently incorrect and non-Supported by facts or evidense.

This guy is great for the Bar Exam, which is pretty handy, because that is what the video concerns.

I love this guy! I literally heard his voice in my head while taking my Civ Pro final

6:33 since you were not trying to bring the statement in for it's truth, then wouldn't the hearsay objection be overruled (rather than sustained)? I just noticed that adamyonghaozheng7868 asked the same question 3 years ago :) [which was never answered]

That was fantastic

I'm excited about the future.

This channel is amazing!! Love your content THANK YOU

Love the mason symbols. These people just don’t see their fate do they

How about in regards the state wanting to terminate my parental rights?

What if you move out and establish residency to a different state before the trial. Can you contest jurisdiction during trial?

This system of attaching to all fathers a percentage payment for the "state of" District of columbia is the entire reason this county has zero infrastructure and is failing in the world today. The USA will crumble because of the poverty this system causes. All the money being made off the people wil become valuless because the country will fail and the money will be inflated as a result so even the people "in the court" think they are winning, They are not. Good bye America. Its all smoke an mirrors presumptions and assumptions Hersay ect. Its a con racket. The real people of this nation can see what is happening and their acquiescence will be their down fall.

Mnemonic: personal jurisdiction Rarely Causes Severe Mental Strain Resident, Consent, Service, Minimum Contacts, Substantial business

More Perfect

I deal with Erie the same way I deal with RAP: pray I don't encounter it, and if I do, ignore it.

Can someone explain to me why OJ was able to be sued in civil court for wrongful death after being found not guilty in criminal court. I get that the family never had their “day in court” … but doesn’t this result in inconsistent verdicts or holdings??

Biggest pot of crap I ever heard

Here's my situation. The plaintiff has made several small-part truth-based claims that we both agree with. I as the defendant have in turn produced a huge amount of counter-evidence showing that his claims are at best half-truths that rely on a huge amount of incorrectly implied context and conveniently ignored the greater reality of the situation. He wants a summary judgment made on the small half-truths that we both agree on while having all the greater evidence that refutes what he is implying with his limited evidence. It's something like this. His claim says that he followed me going 80 MPH and then pulled me over in a residential 25 MPH zone and a kid had run out in front of me on top of it. We both agree that all three events did happen which in that context says I did something very wrong. The greater reality is that he was following me on the interstate in an 80 MPH zone and that I then took an off-ramp into a residential area with a 25 MPH zone where he then pulled me over for a burned-out brake light he observed as I was taking the off-ramp from the interstate into the residential zone and some kid crossed the street half a block ahead of me while I was parked and he was giving me a warning. In his claim, I am at a jailable level guilty and could have killed a kid had he not pulled me over. In my full and complete account with documentation it's a trivial issue that didn't even warrant a ticket and the kid had nothing to do with any of the events. Does the judge side with him because we both agree on his points that I was going 80 MPH, I did get pulled over in a 25 MPH residential zone and a kid crossed the street in front of me, or does he side with me because my evidence shows something far different took place and I can prove he is lying by omission?

"Resident" is a term of subjugation.

BAR attorneys are not lawyers.

Just another corrupt member of the BAR attempting to brainwash the American people. Thankfully, after having read many of the comments to here it is abundantly clear that more and more are learning what their proper Status should be. John, you are in practice with Satan and you'd better get yourself right with God while there's still time.

If plaintiff or non movant party does NOT produce an affidavit let's say plaintiff's own affidavit, will defendants msj be granted? Can plaintiff argue that this is a he said she said case and only a trier of fact can weigh the testimony against each other?

For those who wonder how in the world to distinguish "specific" vs. "general" intent, here's a hint: the distinction is hogwash. There is no principled distinction between the two. Just look to see what mental state (intentional, reckless, negligent) the crime you are looking at requires. Not just my opinion, look in LaFave's treatise on criminal law.

Eerie analysis In diversity actions (state law claims in federal court): determine if the issue is procedural or substantive. If procedural apply federal law, if substantive apply state law. if it's unclear whether the issue is substantive or procedural, then court must determine if federal and state law conflict. If they DONT conflict- apply both harmoniously. If they DO conflict - then court must look to whether there is a federal statute or rule covering the specific issue. If there is no "on point" federal rule or statute, then court has to decide whether to apply federal common law or state law. This decision is based on whether state law is "outcome determinative" I am now on youtube trying to find an example of what "outcome determinative" means/looks like but no luck yet...

Thanks for the video. Btw, you have nice eyes.

I absolutely love Chris Fromm!! He is my current tutor and he makes things so relatable!

Oh yeah

Hello, I work with an investor who does foreclosures & short sales. However, a lot of homeowners want to save their homes, so I'm looking for someone I can refer them to. Nationwide, but FL mostly. Can you handle that, & do you pay for referrals?

BAR courts have no jurisdiction over the state citizen. The 14th amendment was never ratified

You attorney's made it difficult, by poking & pinching documents to death. Most law (if not all) is "contract" law. Statutes, codes, policies nor ordinances are law. If a "law" is not in line with the US Constitution it is void & w/o merit. So much wickedness; treasonous liars & actors.

Watched this on 2x and got more in :07 than I got in 1:10 in CivPro. Phenomenal.

specipic intent general intent Statutory crime = strict liability

"Hello, I'm Sally" "I know I'm going to sue Sally..." Love this profession

This guy is shaky on what scientists do after the 1700s.

His lecture today was great he is funny to!!!!