After a final decision has been made, either party or both may appeal from the judgment if they believe there had been a procedural error made by the trial court. It isn't necessarily an automatic appeal after every judgment has been made, however, if there is a legal basis for the appeal, then one has the right to do so. The prevailing party may appeal, for example, if they wanted a larger award than was granted. The appellate court (which may be structured as an intermediate appellate court) and/or a higher court then affirms the judgment, declines to hear it (which effectively affirms it), reverses—or vacates and remands. This process would then involve sending the lawsuit back to the lower trial court to address an unresolved issue, or possibly request for a whole new trial. Some lawsuits go up and down the appeals ladder repeatedly before final resolution.
San Antonio, TX On March 8, 2019, Joe William Contreras, along with 17 other service members filed a 3M Combat Arms defective earplug lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. According to the Complaint, Contreras and the other plaintiffs suffer from hearing loss because 3M Company and its predecessor sold millions of dollars’ worth of Combat Arms earplugs to the military without disclosing design flaws that rendered the product useless.

Industry, CA: Simon Chu and Charley Loh, part-owners and former executives of Chinese appliance manufacturer Gree Electric Appliances and a company that imported, distributed, and sold China-manufactured dehumidifiers to retailers, allegedly knew the dehumidifiers caught fire but failed to report and recall (too expensive) the defects for at least six months. According to the indictment, the two men “deliberately” withheld information about the defective dehumidifiers.


I have represented myself in various state and federal courts for years and have experienced firsthand just how unfair our system of justice can be against a person who decides to represent himself. Not long ago a federal judge looked me in the eye and told me just before the trial that I wouldn’t win. The judge did a lot of things during the trial to make it unfair for me, but I did win.

When a final judgment is entered, the plaintiff is usually barred under the doctrine of res judicata from relitigating any of the issues, even under different legal theories. Judgments are typically a monetary award. If the defendant fails to pay, the court has various powers to seize any of the defendant's assets located within its jurisdiction, such as:


Women in Need of Change, or WIN Court, is the opportunity for chronic women offenders to invest in themselves and their future. WIN Court is a trauma-responsive court that addresses the behaviors of chronic women offenders arrested in the city of Las Vegas. WIN Court focuses on the individual’s core issues in relationship to trauma and co-occurring mental health behaviors. These traumas contribute to their choices of substance abuse, criminal activity and recidivism. The program offers each individual woman a toolbox to address past traumas in order to move forward to a future of exciting new choices. In a safe environment, the program builds on trust and respect to be able to identify the trauma, employ strategies to normalize the symptoms and manage the related triggers and their reactions. WIN Court addresses chronic women offenders who have amassed misdemeanor offenses within the jurisdiction of the city of Las Vegas change their lives. The participants volunteer to enter into an 18-month to 24-month commitment. The basic requirements may include:
NEW YORK, April 5- A federal judge in Manhattan on Friday rejected Expedia Inc's request for an injunction that would have required United Airlines to continue providing fare data for flights after Sept. 30, when the companies' contract ends. An injunction would have required United, part of Chicago- based United Continental Holdings Inc, to provide Expedia with...
Definitely don't make your litigation decisions for vindictive reasons. You'll only end up hurting yourself. Besides generating excessive litigation expenses, your health and happiness will suffer. If you look honestly in the mirror and realize that your motivation is spite or revenge, it's in your own best interests to find a way to settle or otherwise end the case.
Che Guevara imported preconditioned Communist to Cuba from the same region. Once the number hit critical mass, Castro crushed the free market and implemented hard line Communism. The Democratic Party is using the very same playbook.The Democratic Party is conducting a Communist Revolution, and without question, the Democratic Party is the greatest threat to the United States of America.

A civil case, more commonly known as a lawsuit or controversy, begins when a plaintiff files a document called a complaint with a court, informing the court of the wrong that the plaintiff has allegedly suffered because of the defendant, and requesting a remedy. The remedy sought may be money, an injunction, which requires the defendant to perform or refrain from performing some action, or a declaratory judgment, which determines that the plaintiff has certain legal rights. The remedy will be prescribed by the court if the plaintiff wins the case. A civil case can also be arbitrated through arbitration, which may result in a faster settlement, with lower costs, than could be obtained by going through a trial.
“Take-Two can confirm that the present-day Pinkerton Consulting and Investigation company has withdrawn its claims against Red Dead Redemption 2, and Take-Two will not continue legal action against Pinkerton. Red Dead Redemption 2 is a work of fiction set in the late 1800s that references historical entities active during that time,” a spokesperson for Take-Two told The Verge. Pinkerton didn’t immediately reply to a request for comment.
     5. Be like Clint Eastwood. “Look out for the jurors in the box. If Juror No. 3 is having a coughing fit, suggest a break or ask the judge if the juror can have a cup of water. Bless sneezes. An attorney who represents the National Enquirer told me about a trial in which the tabloid was sued by Clint Eastwood. During the actor’s testimony, an elderly juror sneezed. Eastwood stopped in the middle of his sentence and turned to the juror, meeting her rheumy brown eyes with his piercing blue ones. ‘God bless you, ma’am,’ he said. As she melted, the attorney for the magazine knew he’d lost the case.”
Pretty good book but in the real world it may not help you much. I decided to fight a ticket and the cop lied on the stand and I wasn't really prepared for that and the jurors were all dumb as a box of rocks and I could only choose 5 out of 30 to reject in Voir Dire. So the book has good ideas but the U.S. legal system is so jacked up that if you are a little guy you are going to have to bend over one way or another. Can't wait for the revolution, this system has to go.
As we interviewed experts on the subject, including former Justice Department officials who keep track of these things, we realized that these numbers were extraordinary. No one had an exact count comparing, say, the Obama administration’s record in court after two years with the Trump administration. But as we researched the subject, we found studies estimating the average “win rate” for administrations in the courts was somewhere around 70% whereas the Trump administration appeared to be losing at least 70% of the time.

Depending on the nature of the allegation, a criminal lawyer will sometimes be able to prevent criminal charges from being filed. A lawyer’s job in pre-arrest representation is to manage the flow of information, if any, between you and law enforcement. The information gathering phase is critical in an investigation and making the right decisions about what information to share and not to share could mean the difference between being charged or not being charged, and worse, being found guilty or not-guilty.
Substantial assistance is affectionately known as snitching. While it has a bad rap, it is an extremely useful tool when dealing with criminal cases. If you are not yet charged with a crime and are being investigated, providing substantial assistance can actually prevent you from being charged in some cases. If a warrant cannot be prevented with substantial assistance, charges can often be minimized and/or consequences can be reduced, often significantly.
During the 18th and 19th centuries, it was common for lawyers to speak of bringing an "action" at law and a "suit" in equity. An example of that distinction survives today in the text of the Civil Rights Act of 1871. The fusion of common law and equity in England in the Judicature Acts of 1873 and 1875 led to the collapse of that distinction, so it became possible to speak of a "lawsuit." In the United States, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1938) abolished the distinction between actions at law and suits in equity in federal practice, in favor of a single form referred to as a "civil action."
The International Journal of Legal Information is the official publication of the International Association of Law Libraries. Publishing three times a year, it seeks to advance the exchange of legal information throughout the world. Under the direction of its international editorial board and advisors, the IJLI serves the global community of law librarians, legal scholars, and practitioners through the publication of original articles, conference papers, bibliographies, book reviews, the International Calendar of conferences and events, and other documents concerning all aspects of law and law-related information.

The official ruling of a lawsuit can be somewhat misleading because post-ruling outcomes are often not listed on the internet. For example, in the case of William J. Ralph Jr. v. Lind-Waldock & Company[4] (September 1999), one would assume that Mr. Ralph lost the case when in fact, upon review of the evidence, it as found that Mr. Ralph was correct in his assertion that improper activity took place on the part of Lind-Waldock, and Mr. Ralph settled with Lind-Waldock.[5]

×