This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
But what about practicing law? While legal professionals have been slower to embrace this technology, AI for lawyers is a growing field. Legal firms spent approximately $12 billion on AI in 2017, and experts expect that figure to reach $85 billion by 2027. As these technologies continue to improve, AI in law will only grow.
The law professors detail that the small arms race arises from three main “troubling” legal implications, and it’s looking at the examples of Wisconsin and Georgia’s laws that “exemplify this perilous confluence.”. Legal Solutions.
Bumble responds that “if the law supposes that, the law is a ass – a idiot.” The scene came to mind with a decision yesterday when the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted 4-3 in Sojenhomer v. 53.03, which states that Wisconsin courts “may treat a foreign country as if it were a state” in guardianship proceedings.
In covering the motions hearing last week in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, I noted a surprising comment from Judge Bruce Schroeder that he had “spent hours” with the Wisconsin gun law and could not state with certainty what it means in this case. I have a legal education.”
I recently wrote a column stating that the sixth count appeared to be based on a factually and legally inapplicable provision of Wisconsinlaw. The case against Kyle Rittenhouse just got a little smaller. I could not understand how the judge could allow the count to go to jury.
Gaige Grosskreutz who was shot in the arm by Kyle Rittenhouse during the Kenosha riots in 2020 is now suing him as well as Wisconsin police and officials. Without provocation or any legal justification, Defendant Rittenhouse shot at Grosskreutz from point-blank range, hitting him in the arm. it is back.
They did not have the luxury of reframing the legal standard to achieve their own concept of justice. acquitted Rittenhouse on all charges, politicians and media figures lashed out at the judge, the jury and the entire legal system. When Rittenhouse was allowed to go free, the entire legal system was denounced as racist.
One issue to watch is how Judge Bruce Schroeder handles the gun count, which is based on what I believe is a flawed legal interpretation by the prosecution. Here is the column: The trial of Kyle Rittenhouse increasingly seems like a legal version of the parable of the blind men and the elephant. Biased media viewers.
I recently wrote a column stating that the sixth count appeared to be based on a factually and legally inapplicable provision of Wisconsinlaw. “The Wisconsin Department of Justice honors concealed carry permits issued in Illinois. .” ” However, it was legal in the sense of not being a criminal act.
An informant known as “Big Dan” was paid over $50,000 to get the conspiracy going, including paying for the defendants to travel to Wisconsin to “train.”. As discussed earlier , various key FBI agents and informants were removed from the case due to their own legal problems. The defendants reportedly resisted those entreaties.
And although Mystal has not advocated violence, some on the left are turning to political violence and criminal acts. It is part of the righteous rage that many of them see as absolving them from the basic demands not only of civility but of legality. He reportedly declared, The time for this is over!
In the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, a jury of 11 white jurors and one racial minority rejected wildly inaccurate accounts and voted for acquittal – a result viewed by many legal experts as correct under Wisconsinlaw.
” It was like a Joseph Welch moment in another hearing with then-Wisconsin Republican Sen. Indeed, in the hearing, various Democrats were resurrecting bogus past claims about criminal acts linked to a meeting in Trump Tower with Russian figures. Joe McCarthy.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content