The Missing Witness Inference, An Invited Response and Facts Not In Evidence
From OCDLA Library of Defense
< Blog:Main(Difference between revisions)
This wikilog article is a draft, it was not published yet.
by: Ryan • December 30, 2010 • no comments
(Importing text file) |
m (Text replace - "| Ryan }}" to "| Ryan:Ryan Scott }}") |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I want to draw your attention to a fascinating, [http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/S056715.htm brand new opinion from the Oregon Supreme Court]. Both the opinion and the dissent involve thorough discussions of the 3 things in the title of this post. It is a civil case but of great use - as either a sword or a shield, depending on your situation - for every trial attorney, civil or criminal. | I want to draw your attention to a fascinating, [http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/S056715.htm brand new opinion from the Oregon Supreme Court]. Both the opinion and the dissent involve thorough discussions of the 3 things in the title of this post. It is a civil case but of great use - as either a sword or a shield, depending on your situation - for every trial attorney, civil or criminal. | ||
| − | {{wl-publish: 2010-12-30 21:00:00 -0800 | Ryan }} | + | {{wl-publish: 2010-12-30 21:00:00 -0800 | Ryan:Ryan Scott }} |
Latest revision as of 12:08, August 10, 2013
I want to draw your attention to a fascinating, brand new opinion from the Oregon Supreme Court. Both the opinion and the dissent involve thorough discussions of the 3 things in the title of this post. It is a civil case but of great use - as either a sword or a shield, depending on your situation - for every trial attorney, civil or criminal.
