9:45 a.m. 29S05-1209-CT-557. Wade was injured in a fall from a utility truck’s aerial passenger bucket and filed this product liability claim against the bucket’s maker, Terex-Telelect; a jury returned a verdict for Terex-Telelect, and the Hamilton Superior Court entered judgment on the verdict. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for retrial after concluding that the evidence did not support the trial court’s instruction telling jurors they could presume a defendant is not liable if the defendant proves its product was “state of the art” or complied with applicable governmental regulations.
I highly recommend Deanna and her team of professionals that serve the legal community. Great information and many thanks for sharing.
they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.