Court Procedure

A motion to compel is a legal motion whereby one party is asking the judge to issue a court order to the opposing party to take some action. In the context of document production, this would be part of discovery, where one party is refusing to produce some evidence, and the complaining party is trying to force them to produce that evidence. If the order is granted, the noncomplying party may be subject to severe sanctions if the requested documents are not produced, including penalties payable to the court, paying part of the other parties legal fees, and even a judicial conclusion as to the matter at issue.

Yes. In the United States, ability to pay is not a defense against a civil suit. It is a concern only AFTER a judgement against the indigent person is rendered. An indigent may be granted court-provided defense counsel, though this is not legally required (unlike in a criminal case).

There is no such thing as a tribal court in US law. If you are referring to a Native American reservation, they are sovereign land, and not subject to any United States jurisdiction, except where crime crosses the border into US soil.

You lost the court case and have been ordered to pay up. The shortest, and easiest way around this is to as the court ordered: pay the debt you owe.

Yes, circuit courts do have 3 judge panels.

In the US Circuit Courts or US Courts of Appeals, a case is almost always heard by a panel of three judges, "three-judge panel", who are randomly selected from the available judges including senior judges and judges temporarily assigned to the circuit.

In some complex cases, the entire panel of judges at the court can consider hearing the case, rather than a panel of three judges. Such request for hearing is known as "En banc".

Federal Rules, Title 28, Chapter 3 §46 "Assignment of judges; panels; hearings; quorum" elaborates in detail.

A subpoena can be withdrawn or quashed.

This would be in a civil court as breach of contract.

Yes. Assuming the case was voluntarily dismissed by the DA for lack of evidence, the DA can re-file those same charges at a later date if he obtains additional evidence. Unless the crime is particularly severe or in the public eye in some way, however, it is unlikely many resources will be devoted to obtaining additional evidence.

Also, most crimes in common law jurisdictions have a statute of limitations which requires, in essence, that prosecution be instituted within a certain time. So, again, unless the crime is severe or violent, it will have a relatively brief (2-10 years usually) period in which a person can be prosecuted for it.

Thus while a DA can re-file on charges he voluntarily dismissed, he usually has a limited window in which to do so, and limited resources with which to accomplish it. Absent an external motivating factor like the severity or violent nature of the crime, any public outcry, or personal animosity, a DA re-filing charges would not be very likely to occur.

When a court issues a dissolution of marriage or divorce decree the date on which the judgment was entered will be recited on the face of the decree. However, the law varies in different jurisdictions. In some jurisdictions the decree is immediately final and the parties are free to remarry if they wish. Some jurisdictions require a waiting period before the divorce becomes absolute (or final). That type of judgment is called a decree nisi. In those jurisdictions the marriage is not legally ended until the waiting period has passed.

That is RARELY the case. But it depends on how long it's been since you missed your date, and the violation. It's always the safest bet to bring the bond amount, which you can find out by calling the court, just incase they want to hold you in custody for the court date. If your excuse is legitimate, or you express apologies to the court and make the Judge believe you will not miss your next court day, it is very unlikely they will arrest you. Bring bond money just in case, but if you don't have it just come in with a suite and tie and a letter of apology and you'll be FINE. Remember, a Judge is far more likely to release you on your own recognizance if you show up on your own accord, vs bring brought in my law enforcement in handcuffs on a warrant.

Courts are supposed to first consider how long of a delay there has been, and if the delay is long enough to make it a possible constitutional violation, THEN the next step is for the Court to consider the reasons for the delay and whose fault it was. If there was a long delay but it was due to the Defendant not being ready while the government was ready to prosecute, this Defendant probably has not had his rights violated. But if the defendant was ready and especially if the Defendant asked for a speedy trial and announced "ready" at prior court appearances, then any delay is going to be viewed as the State's problem.

Finally, the Court needs to look at whether there was any "prejudice" to the Defendant. Prejudice means that it's harder for him to defend himself from the charges against him now than it would have been if he had his trial months or years ago. Sometimes prejudice can be presumed if the delay is really long and not excused for good cause, but generally the Defendant will want to show that certain evidence or testimony that he expected to use for his side is no longer available now, but it was available earlier.

It requires a certain fee to file a civil action in court. What that fee may be will vary widely from court system to court system and state to state. As for what the attorney fees might be, no one can predict. Consult with an attorney in your area. Most, but not all, will generally give a few minutes of their time and will certainly tell you their fees.

Making up excuses to get out of jury service is a dereliction of US citizens' responsibilities. Jury duty is one of the very FEW obligations we are asked to perform as citizens. It shouldn't be shirked with excuses. However, IF you have a legitimate reason that is verifiable, the Court may excuse you. As well, for criminal cases, the attorneys might ask that a juror be eliminated.

Well you would have to be more specific about what information you are looking for. But, first he is arrested, charged and booked. Then, he see's a judge to determine if he is able to be released on his own recognizants. If the judge feels compelled to do so can also issue an emergency "no contact order" or " restraining order" to prevent future occurances until his court hearing. At the hearing the man will be seen by the judge for his charges and the man can decide if he wants to have a jury or a judge hearing. In either case if he is charged it is always possible he will be detained. One other thing, even if the man is charged and not found guilty or convicted, he automatically loses his right to bear arms for a minimum of two years. He will not be allowed to have knives, guns, nunchucks, or any weapon of any sort. If an officer finds these in his possession or where he resides at any time, can be in violation of his rights.

an impartial jury is guaranteed in crimalnal cases

I believe it is due process of law

The jury is not supposed to talk to anyone, not family, friends, the media nor even fellow jurors, about the facts of the case until all of the evidence for both sides has been presented and the judge explains the applicable law to it. This prevents a jury from making a premature decision and prejudicing their objectivity. Otherwise, it can talk to anyone about anything else, unless it has been sequestered.

The United States district courts are the general trial courts of the United States federal court system. Both civil and criminal cases are filed in the district court, which is a court of law, equity, and admiralty. Each federal judicial district has at least one courthouse, and many districts have more than one. The formal name of a district court is "the United States District Court for" the name of the district-for example, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. There are 89 districts in the 50 States, with a total of 94 districts including territories. The United States courts of appeals (or circuit courts) are the intermediate appellate courts of the United States federal court system. A court of appeals decides appeals from the district courts within its federal judicial circuit, and in some instances from other designated federal courts and administrative agencies. The circuit courts have the following jurisdictions: Federal Circuit (Washington) D.C. Circuit (Washington) * District of Columbia 1st Circuit (Boston) * Maine * Massachusetts * New Hampshire * Puerto Rico * Rhode Island 2nd Circuit (New York) * Connecticut * New York * Vermont 3rd Circuit (Philadelphia) * Delaware * New Jersey * Pennsylvania * U.S. Virgin Islands 4th Circuit (Richmond) * Maryland * North Carolina * South Carolina * Virginia * West Virginia 5th Circuit (New Orleans) * Louisiana * Mississippi * Texas 6th Circuit (Cincinnati) * Kentucky * Michigan * Ohio * Tennessee 7th Circuit (Chicago) * Illinois * Indiana * Wisconsin 8th Circuit (St. Louis) * Arkansas * Iowa * Minnesota * Missouri * Nebraska * North Dakota * South Dakota 9th Circuit (San Francisco) * Alaska * Arizona * California * Guam * Hawaii * Idaho * Montana * Nevada * Northern Mariana Islands * Oregon * Washington 10th Circuit (Denver) * Colorado * Kansas * New Mexico * Oklahoma * Utah * Wyoming 11th Circuit (Atlanta) * Alabama * Florida * Georgia

Most states have local trial courts--municipal, county, district, and small-claims courts. Millions of civil and criminal cases are tried at this level.

.... is called a VERDICT (verdicts are rendered by a jury); court decisions are typically called judgements.

Marshal Truegood was the first black Justis in court.