POPULARITY
6 episodes with Restatement
8 episodes with Restatement
3 episodes with Restatement
2 episodes with Restatement
2 episodes with Restatement
2 episodes with Restatement
3 episodes with Restatement
2 episodes with Restatement
2 episodes with Restatement
Today's podcast show features a discussion with Professor Gregory Klass of Georgetown University Law School about an article he co-authored with Professor Ian Ayres, entitled “How to Use the Restatement of Consumer Contracts: A Guide for Judges.” The article will be published this year in the Harvard Business Law Review (vol 15), and is available here. The abstract of the article states: “In the absence of major legislation or regulatory action, U.S. consumers will continue to look to courts and the common law for protection when businesses engage in unfair and deceptive contracting practices. In May 2022, the American Law Institute approved the Restatement of the Law, Consumer Contracts. This new Restatement provides a valuable resource for courts tasked with deciding the legal effects of standard terms that businesses draft and consumers do not read. This essay identifies six pieces of the new Restatement we believe courts should pay special attention to and discusses the importance of each. It also charts several ways courts might go beyond the new Restatement to protect consumers against abusive contracting practices. Unless and until legislators and regulators step in, U.S. courts should continue to reshape the common law to address risks that new technologies of contracting create.” We discuss the following questions related to this Restatement: The history and scope of the Restatement of Consumer Contracts project Why was there perceived to be a need for a separate restatement for consumer contract law when there has been a Restatement of Contracts for many decades? Was it wise to publish a Restatement of Consumer Contracts as opposed to a Statement of Principles since the document to a large extent focuses on what the law should be, rather than on what the law is? The identification of several parts of the Restatement to which Professor Klass believes the courts should pay special attention: a. The “reasonable expectations” rule in Section 4; b. The unconscionability defense in Section 6; c. The deception defense in Section 7; and, d. The Parol Evidence rule Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel and former chair for 25 years of the Consumer Financial Services Group, hosts the discussion.
On January 4 of this year, we released a podcast show entitled; “A look at a new approach to consumer contracts”. Our special guest at that time was Professor Andrea Boyack, a Professor at the University of Missouri School of Law. That podcast was based on a then recent law review article published by Professor Boyack entitled “The Shape of Consumer Contracts, 101 Denv L. Rev. 1 (2023). Today, we are joined again by Professor Boyack who has written a follow-up article entitled: “Abuse of Contract: Boilerplate Erasure of Consumer Counterparty Rights,” University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2024-03, which is the subject of our new show. The abstract of her article accurately describes the points that Professor Boyack made during the podcast show: Contract law and the new Restatement of the Law of Consumer Contracts generally treats the entirety of the company's boilerplate as presumptively binding. Entrusting the content of consumer contracts to companies creates a fertile legal habitat for abuse through boilerplate design. There is no consensus on how widespread or severe abuse of contract is. Some consumer law scholars have warned of dangers inherent in granting companies unrestrained power to sneak waivers into their online terms, but others contend that market forces adequately constrain potential abuse. On the other hand, in the absence of adequate consumer knowledge and power, market competition might instead fuel the spread of abusive boilerplate provisions as companies compete to insulate themselves from costs. The new Restatement and several prominent scholars claim that existing protective judicial doctrines siphon off the worst abuses among adhesive contracts. They are willing to accept those abuses that slip through the cracks as the unavoidable cost of a functioning, modern economy. The raging debate over how to best constrain contractual abuse relies mainly on speculation regarding the proliferation and extent of sneak-in waivers. This article provides some necessary missing data by examining the author's study of 100 companies' online terms and conditions (the T&C Study). The T&C Study tracked the extent to which the surveyed companies' boilerplate purported to erase consumer default rights within four different categories, thereby helping to assess the effectiveness of existing market and judicial constraints on company overreach. Evidence from the T&C Study shows that the overwhelming majority of consumer contracts contain multiple categories of abusive terms. The existing uniformity of boilerplate waivers undermines the theory that competition and reputation currently act as effective bulwarks against abuse. After explaining and discussing the T&C Study and its results, this article suggests how such data can assist scholars and advocates in more effectively protecting and empowering consumers. We also discuss two separate CFPB initiatives pertaining to consumer contracts. On June 4 of this year, the CFPB issued Circular 2024-03 (“Circular”) warning that the use of unlawful or unenforceable terms and conditions in contracts for consumer financial products or services may violate the prohibition on deceptive acts or practices in the Consumer Financial Protection Act. We previously drafted a blog post and Law360 article about this circular. The CFPB has also issued a proposed rule to establish a system for the registration of nonbanks subject to CFPB supervision that use “certain terms or conditions that seek to waive consumer rights or other legal protections or limit the ability of consumers to enforce their rights.” Arbitration provisions are among the terms that would trigger registration. The CFPB has not yet finalized this proposed rule and it seems likely that it will never be finalized in light of its very controversial nature and the fact that Director Chopra will be replaced on January 20 with a new Acting Director. Alan Kaplinsky, the former Chair of Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Services Group for 25 years and now Senior Counsel, hosts this episode.
Advance your career success with better communication skills Simple steps to become an effective communicator Episode 213 (Ty is based in Toronto, Canada) In this conversation with Ty Hoesgen, we explore: The lack of proper communication skills for students The danger of depending only on your technical expertise Communication is a learnable skill Even shy, clumsy introverts can learn how to communicate Why people start talking before they speak The importance of relevant structure and organization Coaching your team to improve How to use the PREP structure (Point, Reason, Example, Point) About our guest, Ty Hoesgen: Ty Hoesgen grew up as a shy, awkward farm kid near a town of 800 people. He's the author of "Elite Communication Skills". You can take the free course, "Speak like a Confident Leader in 7 Days: at https://howtospeakbetter.com/ Follow at https://www.instagram.com/tyhoesgen/ Connect at https://www.linkedin.com/in/tyhoesgen/ ----- Excerpts from this conversation with Ty Hoesgen: There's a famous scene from the show The Office, if any of your listeners have seen the office, and it's Michael Scott, who is the head boss there, and he says, Sometimes I just start a sentence. And I don't really know where it's going. But I just hope I find it along the way. And that's what a lot of people seem to do, especially in the corporate world, when it matters the most, to be clear, to have people understand, to be persuasive to be powerful. And so one of the biggest mistakes is just having no structure, no organization, in the way that you are explaining something, you're just rolling the dice and hoping for the best when you open your mouth. ----- So how can someone better structure their message? This is something that should absolutely be taught in schools structuring your message. So first, what is your intended message? This is something that you should know, before you start speaking. I teach a framework that a lot of my clients find very easy, and they find it very useful. It's called the PRP framework. So it's point. Reason. Point. It's very simple. If you get asked a question, you start with your main point first. So your intended message first, what's really the main thing you want them to know? Then the reasons so why do you think this? Where did this point come from? Why do you believe this? And so you give your reasons for that. And then because people tend to hear and remember the things that they hear first, and the things that they hear last the most. Whereas you want to restate our point at the end, because we want the last thing they hear to be that main message. So we've got our point, first, than our reason or reasons. And we restate it with a point at the end, the Restatement at the end, very underrated and necessary. Because if you ever been in a situation where the conversation just kind of gets off track, sometimes that's because somebody has ended their point with something that's a little bit off. And people respond to whatever they hear most recently. So if we restate the main point, at the end, it's a lot less likely those conversations are going to get off track. ----- ----more---- Your Intended Message is the podcast about how you can boost your career and business success by honing your communication skills. We'll examine the aspects of how we communicate one-to-one, one to few and one to many – plus that important conversation, one to self. In these interviews we will explore presentation skills, public speaking, conversation, persuasion, negotiation, sales conversations, marketing, team meetings, social media, branding, self talk and more. Your host is George Torok George is a specialist in communication skills. Especially presentation. He's fascinated by the links between communication and influencing behaviors. He delivers training and coaching programs to help leaders and promising professionals deliver the intended message for greater success. Connect with George www.SpeechCoachforExecutives.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/georgetorokpresentations/ https://www.youtube.com/user/presentationskills https://www.instagram.com/georgetorok/
Our special guest is Andrea Boyack, Professor, University of Missouri School of Law. We first discuss the principles that underlie our current system of consumer contracts and the system's role in promoting transactional efficiency and other objectives. Prof. Boyack then provides her views on why the application of traditional contract law to the modern consumer contract context is not in the best interests of consumers and offers a different approach to consumer contracts in which a consumers can shape the terms of their contracts. In particular, she explains how this approach would treat a consumer's choice to do business with a company as legally distinct from assent to particular terms in the company's contracts. Prof. Boyack also shares her views on the recent Restatement of the Law of Consumer Contracts. We conclude with a discussion of the controversy that surrounds arbitration provisions, how Prof. Boyack's new approach to consumer contracts would impact the use of such provisions, and what legal changes would be necessary to implement her approach. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Services Group, hosts the conversation.
0:00 Intro 2:17 Restatement 16:06 The Luciferian Plot - #Israel is taking significant losses in armor as #Hamas fighters hit them a point blank range - Israel's "Iron Dome" is failing as missiles lose guidance and return to strike Israel itself - Freemason Albert Pike wrote letter in 1871 predicting THREE world wars: - World War III would involved #Zionists and Islamists destroying each other - Christians would be devastated to see #Israel destroyed, losing faith in God - Western nations to be economically and morally exhausted - The "Rapture" was invented in the mid-1800s by John Nelson Darby - #Rapture appears nowhere in the #Bible - Christians aren't going to be physically lifted into the sky to meet God - When that Rapture doesn't happen, while Israel is destroyed, Christians will lose faith - At this moment, Lucifer seduces the world to turn to him - Many disillusioned #Christians turn to #Lucifer and Christianity suffers greatly - TODAY'S NEWS: #Israel bombs a major university in Gaza as atrocities continue - Top Israeli government official suggests dropping a nuclear bomb on #Gaza - Mass migration of Muslims into western countries is part of the plan for causing strife - This is why the U.S. southern border is kept wide open For more updates, visit: http://www.brighteon.com/channel/hrreport NaturalNews videos would not be possible without you, as always we remain passionately dedicated to our mission of educating people all over the world on the subject of natural healing remedies and personal liberty (food freedom, medical freedom, the freedom of speech, etc.). Together, we're helping create a better world, with more honest food labeling, reduced chemical contamination, the avoidance of toxic heavy metals and vastly increased scientific transparency. ▶️ Every dollar you spend at the Health Ranger Store goes toward helping us achieve important science and content goals for humanity: https://www.healthrangerstore.com/ ▶️ Sign Up For Our Newsletter: https://www.naturalnews.com/Readerregistration.html ▶️ Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/hrreport ▶️ Join Our Social Network: https://brighteon.social/@HealthRanger ▶️ Check In Stock Products at: https://PrepWithMike.com
a) Restatement of the Rhetorical Aims of the Gorgias; the Inconsistency Between the View Presented on Rhetoric in the Gorgias and that in Other Dialogues. Philosophers must defend the virtues of the many-- chiefly, self-restraint, sophrosune, and justice--if they are to rule, and if they are to have anything to rule at all.
UPSC, SSC, UGC Preparation | Kapil Balhara | News Current Affairs General Knowledge Newspapers
In this thought-provoking podcast, Kapil Balhara from Global Demos delves into the significance of the legal profession in the judicial process and the ethical aspects that govern it. The legal profession has played a pivotal role throughout history in upholding rights and values, ensuring the rule of law prevails, and fostering a commitment to public service. Lawyers, as officers of the court, carry the responsibility of maintaining sincerity, integrity, and a fiduciary relationship with their clients and colleagues. Taking a historical perspective, the podcast traces the evolution of the legal profession during the British period in India. We explore the impact of significant developments like the Mayor's Courts, the Regulating Act, the Charter of 1753, and the Indian High Courts Act of 1861. These acts not only established key legal institutions but also brought about a transformation in legal practice and representation in India. After India gained independence, the All India Bar Committee emerged as a significant force in advocating for a unified legal profession. The podcast analyzes the All India Bar Council proposal and its influence on shaping the Advocates Act of 1961. This landmark legislation simplified and unified the legal profession, established the Bar Council of India as the highest authority, and set comprehensive rules and principles for legal practice. Ethics and professional conduct are of utmost importance for lawyers. The podcast emphasizes the significance of ethical standards in the legal profession, including responsibilities towards clients, the court, opponents, and the public. We explore the Bar Council of India rules that govern ethical conduct, safeguard the rights of advocates, and ensure impartiality in upholding the rule of law. With a focus on the role of lawyers in the judicial process, the podcast highlights the multifaceted responsibilities they shoulder. Lawyers are instrumental in providing legal advice, drafting legal documents, and facilitating litigation and lawmaking. They act as guardians of the rule of law, ensuring equal treatment, and fairness in the legal process. Their role is vital in upholding dignity and promoting peace and order in society. Throughout the episode, Kapil Balhara emphasizes the importance of ethical conduct for lawyers. Upholding the trust between litigants and courts, adhering to professional standards, and ensuring justice is delivered with integrity are the key principles that govern the legal profession. The podcast also delves into the Indian judiciary's recognition of ethics in the judicial process and the adoption of the "Restatement of Values of Judicial Life" by the Supreme Court. Join us in this insightful podcast episode as we explore the legal profession's historical development, its transformation, and the crucial role it plays in upholding justice, integrity, and trust in the judicial process. Keywords: Legal Profession, Lawyers, Bar Council of India, Professional Ethics, Advocates, Judicial Process, Ethical Conduct, Advocates Act, Rule of Law #ethics #kapilbalhara #globaldemos #legalprofession #upsc #crackupsc # ugcnet #judicialexam
We're back with a new FAB 15! This time it's the FAB 15 TV Show Themes. It's a fun talk. Your Uncle Derek and Papa Dave are on stunningly different pages this time, so you get to hear about a whole lot of songs! Check it out! Companion Blog: http://emptychecking.blogspot.com Email: db@derekbrink.com 0:00 - Intro 17:26 - #15 - It should be higher / It's an obscure pull 22:49 - #14 - If you wanna start talking, I'll Google. 27:47 - #13 - Derek explains Butt-Rock. 33:43 - #12 - I dipped into kids shows. 39:40 - #11 - Would you like a banana? 50:50 - #10 - Too many alongs... 57:22 - #9 - You're over there giggling. 1:06:08 - #8 - Ya' hear that, Daniel Dae Kim? 1:14:24 - #7 - It WAS written for the show. 1:17:20 - #6 - Snaps and whistling... 1:23:46 - #5 - I changed bananas to nuts. 1:32:04 - #4 - INELIGIBLE 1:39:24 - #3 - Making the final list is going to be so hard... 1:42:58 - #2 - Senior Pranks... 1:50:02 - #1 - You will NEVER HEAR IT. 1:53:41 - Figuring out the 15... 1:53:58 - Music Break to symbolize time passing - Lectio Divina 1:54:27 - A FAB 15, in principle... 1:55:48 - Picking #1 2:01:28 - Honorable Mentions, Alan Thicke, and Bob Ross. 2:19:47 - Restatement of the final list and outro. (TV Static used in the "15" was listed for free use at https://depositphotos.com/80510860/stock-photo-tv-damage-television-static-noise.html)
Brandon Butler is a rockstar in the copyright world, focusing on libraries and fair use. He has now opened a law firm that focuses on documentary films and fair use, among other subjects. He joins us for an hour. The law firm, Jaszi Butler, can be found at https://www.usefairuse.com/. We talk about the state of fair use, and in particular the current case at the U.S. Supreme Court about an Andy Warhol painting of Prince. We also discuss whether fair use applies to people taking pictures of patterns in quilt shops. (Towards the end of the interviews)Here is his bio: Brandon Butler is a copyright lawyer and expert on the lawful use of archival materials. Brandon is currently the Director of Information Policy at the University of Virginia Library. Previously, he was the Practitioner-in-Residence at the American University Washington College of Law's Samuelson-Glushko Intellectual Property Clinic, where he taught courses on copyright and fair use, and supervised student attorneys in the representation of artists, filmmakers, publishers, authors, and entrepreneurs in a variety of intellectual property matters. Brandon was also the Director of Public Policy at the Association of Research Libraries, where he advocated for fair copyright and intellectual freedom on behalf of the nation's most prominent academic and research libraries. Brandon graduated from the University of Virginia School of Law and was an associate at Dow Lohnes LLP (later merged with Cooley LLP), in Washington, D.C. Brandon is the Law and Policy Advisor to the Software Preservation Network, and is an Advisor to the American Law Institute's Restatement of the Law, Copyright. He is on the editorial board of the Journal of Copyright in Education and Libraries and is the author of a variety of journal articles and book chapters about copyright and fair use. In college, Brandon was the local music reporter for Athens, GA alt-weekly The Flagpole, and he took a semester off to tour the country as a substitute guitarist in his friends' punk band.Brandon is admitted to the bar in Washington, D.C.
E-commerce and electronic contracting are more important than ever as we move into the post-COVID 19 era. We first review legal requirements for electronic contracting and disclosures including the E-SIGN Act, state Uniform Electronic Transactions Acts, FTC guidance on delivery of disclosures and comments on use of “dark patterns,” and DOJ comments on website accessibility. We then review recent case law on e-contracting and disclosures and the Restatement's provisions on contract adoption and manifestation of consumer assent. We conclude with a discussion of best practices for establishing an e-contracting process that clearly evidences the consumer's manifestation of assent. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Services Group, hosts the conversation, joined by Michael Guerrero, a partner in the Group, and Mark Levin, Senior Counsel in the Group.
Nuisance. "Nuisance" is traditionally used to describe an activity which is harmful or annoying to others such as indecent conduct or a rubbish heap. Nuisances either affect private individuals (private nuisance) or the general public (public nuisance). The claimant can sue for most acts that interfere with their use and enjoyment of their land. In English law, whether activity was an illegal nuisance depended upon the area and whether the activity was "for the benefit of the commonwealth", with richer areas subject to a greater expectation of cleanliness and quiet. The case Jones v Powell (1629) provides an early example, in which a person's professional papers were damaged by the vapors of a neighboring brewery. Although the outcome of this case is unclear, Whitelocke of the Court of the King's Bench is recorded as saying that since the water supply in area was already contaminated, the nuisance was not actionable as it is "better that they should be spoiled than that the commonwealth stand in need of good liquor". In English law, a related category of tort liability was created in the case of Rylands v Fletcher (1868): strict liability was established for a dangerous escape of some hazard, including water, fire, or animals as long as the cause was not remote. In Cambridge Water Company Limited v Eastern Counties Leather plc (1994), chemicals from a factory seeped through a floor into the water table, contaminating East Anglia's water reservoirs. The Rylands rule remains in use in England and Wales. In Australian law, it has been merged into negligence. Economic torts. Economic torts typically involve commercial transactions, and include tortious interference with trade or contract, fraud, injurious falsehood, and negligent misrepresentation. Negligent misrepresentation torts are distinct from contractual cases involving misrepresentation in that there is no privity of contract; these torts are likely to involve pure economic loss which has been less-commonly recoverable in tort. One criterion for determining whether economic loss is recoverable is the "foreseeability" doctrine. The economic loss rule is highly confusing and inconsistently applied and began in 1965 from a California case involving strict liability for product defects; in 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court adopted the doctrine in East River SS Corporation v Transamerica Deleval, Incorporation. In 2010, the supreme court of the U.S. state of Washington replaced the economic loss doctrine with an "independent duty doctrine". Economic antitrust torts have been somewhat submerged by modern competition law. However, in the United States, private parties are permitted in certain circumstances to sue for anticompetitive practices, including under federal or state statutes or on the basis of common law tortious interference, which may be based upon the Restatement (Second) of Torts §766. Negligent misrepresentation as tort where no contractual privity exists was disallowed in England by Derry v Peek ; however, this position was overturned in Hedley Byrne v Heller in 1964 so that such actions were allowed if a "special relationship" existed between the plaintiff and defendant. United States courts and scholars "paid lip-service" to Derry; however, scholars such as William Prosser argued that it was misinterpreted by English courts. The case of Ultramares Corporation v Touche (1932) limited the liability of an auditor to known identified beneficiaries of the audit and this rule was widely applied in the United States until the 1960s. The Restatement (Second) of Torts expanded liability to "foreseeable" users rather than specifically identified "foreseen" users of the information, dramatically expanding liability and affecting professionals such as accountants, architects, attorneys, and surveyors. As of 1989, most U.S. jurisdictions follow either the Ultramares approach or the Restatement approach. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support
An ultrahazardous activity in the common law of torts is one that is so inherently dangerous that a person engaged in such an activity can be held strictly liable for injuries caused to another person, even if the person engaged in the activity took every reasonable precaution to prevent others from being injured. In the Restatement of the Law 2nd, Torts 2nd, the term has been abandoned in favor of the phrase "inherently dangerous activity." Categories of ultrahazardous activity. Several categories of activities are commonly recognized as being inherently hazardous; those who engage in them are subject to strict liability. These include: Transportation, storage, and use of dynamite and other explosives. Transportation, storage, and use of radioactive materials. Transportation, storage, and use of certain hazardous chemicals Keeping of wild animals (for example animals that are not normally domesticated in that area). Note that in this context, "domesticated" does not merely refer to animals that are commonly bred and raised in captivity, such as alligators. Keeping of domesticated animals that have a known propensity for dangerous behavior (for example keeping a dog that has attacked people before). Someone who is injured by one of these inherently hazardous activities while trespassing on the property of the person engaged in the activity is barred from suing under a strict liability theory. Instead, they must prove that the property owner was negligent. In the United Kingdom, this area of law is governed by the rule established in Rylands v Fletcher. Deep pocket as a slang term. The term “deep pockets” (also given as “deep pocket” and “deep pocketed") is attested sparsely in the 1940s through the 1960s but became popular with the litigation explosion of the 1970s. A person with “short arms and deep pockets” is a person (sometimes derided as “miserly” or “cheap") who saves money and doesn't often spend it. The term “short arms and deep/long pockets” is cited in print from at least 1952. In Ireland, this phrase was attached to a wealthy businessman from Tipparary who, upon his round of drinks, would break his glass on the floor, knowing the owner of the pub would ask him to leave. This was also called the “O'Shea Fiddle”. A writ of execution (also known as an execution) is a court order granted to put in force a judgment of possession obtained by a plaintiff from a court. When issuing a writ of execution, a court typically will order a sheriff or other similar official to take possession of property owned by a judgment debtor. Such property will often then be sold in a sheriff's sale and the proceeds remunerated to the plaintiff in partial or full satisfaction of the judgment. It is generally considered preferable for the sheriff simply to take possession of money from the defendant's bank account. If the judgment debtor owns real property, the judgment creditor can record the execution to "freeze" the title until the execution is satisfied. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support
CHAPTER VI.Restatement of the difficulty of a silent Heaven - The solution must be found in Scripture, and notably in the Epistles of Paul - But the discussion assumes that these Epistles contain the revelation of Christianity - This thesis discussed - Christianity distinguished from the religion of Christendom
Kristin Henning is the Blume Professor of Law and Director of the Juvenile Justice Clinic and Initiative at Georgetown Law, where she and her law students represent youth accused of delinquency in Washington, DC. Kris was previously the Lead Attorney for the Juvenile Unit of the D.C. Public Defender Service and is currently the Director of the Mid-Atlantic Juvenile Defender Center. She has been representing children accused of a crime for more than 25 years. Kris trains state actors across the country on the impact of racial bias in the juvenile and criminal legal systems. Her workshops help stakeholders recognize their own biases and develop strategies to counter them. Kris also worked closely with the McArthur Foundation's Juvenile Indigent Defense Action Network to create a 41-volume Juvenile Training Immersion Program (JTIP), a national training curriculum for juvenile defenders.She now co-hosts, with the National Juvenile Defender Center (NJDC), an annual week-long JTIP summer academy for defenders. In 2019, Kris partnered with NJDC to launch a Racial Justice Toolkit for youth advocates, and again in 2020, to launch the Ambassadors for Racial Justice program, a year-long program for juvenile defenders committed to challenging racial injustice in the juvenile legal system through litigation and systemic reform.Kris writes extensively about race, adolescence, and policing. Her new book, The Rage of Innocence: How America Criminalizes Black Youth, is forthcoming with Pantheon Books (Penguin Random House) on September 28, 2021. Her previous work appears in journals and books such as Policing the Black Man: Arrest, Prosecution and Imprisonment (2017, edited by Angela J. Davis) and Punishment in Popular Culture (2015, edited by Charles J. Ogletree, Jr. and Austin Sarat). The race features prominently in her articles such as The Reasonable Black Child: Race, Adolescence and the Fourth Amendment, 67 Am. U. L. Rev. 1513 (2018), Race, Paternalism and the Right to Counsel, 54 Amer. Crim. L. Rev. 649 (2017), and Criminalizing Normal Adolescent Behavior in Communities of Color: The Role of Prosecutors in Juvenile Justice Reform, 98 Cornell L. Rev. 383 (2013). Professor Henning is also an editor and co-author of the anthology Rights, Race, and Reform: Fifty Years of Child Advocacy in the Juvenile Justice System (2018).Henning serves on the Board of Directors for the Center for Children's Law and Policy and is the Director of the Mid-Atlantic Juvenile Defender Center. She has served as an expert juvenile justice consultant to several state and federal agencies, including the USDOJ's Civil Rights Division, and was the Reporter for the ABA Task Force on Dual Jurisdiction Youth. She is also a lead contributor to the Juvenile Law and Practice chapter of the District of Columbia Bar Practice Manual and has served as an investigator in eight state assessments of the access to counsel and quality of representation for accused juveniles. Professor Henning is the recipient of many honours, including the 2021 Juvenile Leadership Prize, the Robert E. Shepherd, Jr. Award for Excellence in Juvenile Defense from NJDC, and the Shanara Gilbert Award from the American Association of Law Schools for her commitment to justice on behalf of children, selection to the American Law Institute (ALI), an appointment as an Adviser to ALI's Restatement on Children and the Law project. In 2005, Professor Henning was selected as a Fellow in the Emerging Leaders Program of the Duke University Terry Sanford Institute of Public Policy and the Graduate School of Business at the University of Cape Town, South Africa. Professor Henning travelled to Liberia in 2006 and 2007 to aid the country in juvenile justice reform. She received her B.A. from Duke University, a J.D. from Yale Law School, and an LL.M. from Georgetown Law. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. Become at member at: https://plus.acast.com/s/tobyonathursday.
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Deliberation, Reactions, and Control: Tentative Definitions and a Restatement of Instrumental Convergence, published by Oliver Sourbut on June 27, 2022 on The AI Alignment Forum. This analysis is speculative. The framing has been refined in conversation and private reflection and research. To some extent it feels vacuous, but at least valuable for further research and communication. A cluster of questions fundamental to many concerns around risks from artificial systems regard the concepts of search, planning, and 'deliberateness'. How do these arise? What can we predict about their occurrence and their consequences? How strong are they? What are they anyway? Here is laid out one part of a conceptual decomposition which maps well onto many known systems and may allow further work towards answering more of those questions. The ambition is to really get at the heart of what is algorithmically happening in 'optimising systems', including humans, animals, algorithmic optimisers like SGD, and contemporary and future computational artefacts. That said, I do not have any privileged insight into the source code (or its proper interpretation!) for the examples discussed, so while this framing has already generated new insights for me, it may or may not be 'the actual algorithmic truth'. We start with the analysis: a definition of 'deliberation' and its components, then of 'reactions' and 'control'. Next we consider, in light of these, what makes a deliberator or controller 'good'. We find conceptual connections with discussions of instrumental convergence. Little attention is given here to how to determine what the goals are, which is obviously also important. These concepts were generated by contemplating various aspects of many different goal-directed systems and pulling out commonalities. Some readers may prefer to start with the examples, which include animals, plants, natural selection, gradient descent, bureaucracies, and others. Here in the conceptual section I'll footnote particularly relevant concrete examples where I anticipate them helping to convey my point. A full treatment is absent, but two major deferences to embedded agency underlie this analysis. A Cartesian separation need not be assumed, except over 'actor-moments' rather than temporally-extended 'actors'. And a major driver for this sequence is a fundamental recognition that any goal-directed behaviour instantiated in the real world must have bounded computational capacity per time[1]. Inspiration and related My (very brief) 'Only One Shot' intuition pump for embedded agency may help to convey some background assumptions (especially regarding how time and actor-moments fit into this picture). Scott Garrabrant's (A→B)→A talks about 'agency' and 'doing things on purpose'. I'm trying to unpack that further. The (open) question Does Agent-like Behaviour Imply Agent-like Architecture? is related and I hope for the perspective here to be useful toward answering that question. Alex Flint's excellent piece The ground of optimization informs some of the perspective here, especially a focus on scope of generalisation and robustness to perturbation. Daniel Filan's Bottle Caps Aren't Optimisers and Abram Demski's Selection vs Control begin discussing the algorithmic internals of optimising systems, which is the intent here also. Risks from Learned Optimization is of course relevant. John Wentworth's discussions of abstraction (for example What is Abstraction?) especially with regards its predictive properties for a non-omniscient computer, are central to the notion of abstraction employed here. Related are the good and gooder regulator theorems, which touch closely computationally upstream of the aspects discussed here while making fewer concessions to embedded agency. Definitions Deliberation A deliberation is any p...
United States. Equitable estoppel. Equitable estoppel is the American counterpart to estoppel by representation. Its elements are summarized as: Facts misrepresented or concealed, Knowledge of true facts, Fraudulent intent, Inducement and reliance, Injury to complainant, and, Clear, concise, unequivocal proof of actus (not by implication). For example, in Aspex Eyewear v Clariti Eyewear, eyeglass frame maker Aspex sued competitor Clariti for patent infringement. Aspex waited three years, without responding to a request that it list the infringed patent claims, before asserting its patent in litigation. During this period, Clariti expanded its marketing and sales of the products. The Federal Circuit found that Aspex misled Clariti to believe it would not enforce its patent, and thus estopped Aspex from proceeding with the suit. Another example of equitable estoppel is the case of Sakharam Ganesh Pandit, an Indian emigrant and lawyer who was granted American citizenship in 1914 due to his designation as "white". Subsequently, Pandit bought property, was admitted to the California bar, married a white woman, and renounced his rights to property and inheritance in British India. Following the Supreme Court case United States v Thind, which found that Indians were considered non-white, and in which Pandit represented the applicant, Bhagat Singh Thind, the US government moved to strip Pandit of his "illegally procured" citizenship. Pandit successfully challenged the denaturalization, arguing that under equitable estoppel, he would be unjustly harmed by losing his citizenship, as it would cause him to become stateless, lose his profession as a lawyer, and make his marriage illegal. In U.S. v Pandit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Pandit's citizenship, ending denaturalization processes against him and other Indian-Americans. Promissory estoppel. In many jurisdictions of the United States, promissory estoppel is an alternative to consideration as a basis for enforcing a promise. It is also sometimes called detrimental reliance. The American Law Institute in 1932 included the principle of estoppel into § 90 of the Restatement of Contracts, stating: A promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance of a definite and substantial character on the part of the promisee and which does induce such action or forbearance is binding if injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise. — Restatement (Second) removed the requirement that the detriment be "substantial". However: Equitable estoppel is distinct from promissory estoppel. Promissory estoppel involves a clear and definite promise, while equitable estoppel involves only representations and inducements. The representations at issue in promissory estoppel go to future intent, while equitable estoppel involves statement of past or present fact. It is also said that equitable estoppel lies in tort, while promissory estoppel lies in contract. The major distinction between equitable estoppel and promissory estoppel is that the former is available only as a defense, while promissory estoppel can be used as the basis of a cause of action for damages. — 28 American Jurisprudence 2d Estoppel and Waiver § 34 --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support
With ALI's members poised to approve the current draft of the new Restatement, providers need to understand the Restatement's impact on their consumer agreements, particularly those entered into online. After reviewing the rationale for the new Restatement and ALI's approach to developing the rules it contains, we look at the issues covered by each section, such as the rules that deal with assent to contract terms, change in terms, unconscionability, and deception. We also discuss how businesses can use the Restatement to their benefit and ALI's next steps for finalizing the draft. Alan Kaplinsky, Ballard Spahr Senior Counsel, leads the conversation.
False imprisonment or unlawful imprisonment occurs when a person intentionally restricts another person's movement within any area without legal authority, justification, or the restrained person's permission. Actual physical restraint is not necessary for false imprisonment to occur. A false imprisonment claim may be made based upon private acts, or upon wrongful governmental detention. For detention by the police, proof of false imprisonment provides a basis to obtain a writ of habeas corpus. Under common law, false imprisonment is both a crime and a tort. Imprisonment. Within the context of false imprisonment, an imprisonment occurs when a person is restrained from moving from a location or bounded area, as a result of a wrongful intentional act, such as the use of force, threat, coercion, or abuse of authority. Detention that is not false imprisonment. Not all acts of involuntary detention amount to false imprisonment. An accidental detention will not support a claim of false imprisonment since false imprisonment requires an intentional act. The law may privilege a person to detain somebody else against their will. A legally authorized detention does not constitute false imprisonment. For example, if a parent or legal guardian of a child denies the child's request to leave their house, and prevents them from doing so, this would not ordinarily constitute false imprisonment. By country. United States. Under United States law, police officers have the right to detain individuals based on probable cause that a crime has been committed and the individual was involved, or based on reasonable suspicion that the individual has been, is, or is about to be engaged in a criminal activity. Elements. To prevail under a false imprisonment claim, a plaintiff must prove: 1. Willful detention in a bounded area 2. Without consent; and 3. Without authority of lawful arrest. (Restatement of the Law, Second, Torts) --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support
Occasionally we get a court case that has ripple effects across the fiduciary, asset management and investment management industries. In this episode, we're going to look at the Potentially massive implications of the recent Supreme Court case, Hughes vs Northwestern The original issue before the Court was whether or not the 403(B) plan participants had properly plead their case in their complaint. The lower courts had dismissed the case, relying on a concept known as the “menu of options” defense. The basic argument of the “menu of options” defense has been that plans satisfy their fiduciary duties under ERISA as long they offered a mixture of investment options-- even if some of those investment options would be considered imprudent under applicable legal standards. In a unanimous 8-0 vote, the Court rejected the “menu of options” defense. The implications of this case could be far-reaching and include investment fiduciaries of all stripes including trustees and potentially RIA's and other wealth management firms. To help us understand the case and its impact on ERISA matters and the fiduciary landscape in general, I'm going to speak to JAMES WATKINS. Jim provides all manner of fiduciary counsel- He is a Certified Financial Planner® professional, owns the Watkins Law Firm out of Georgia, and has been an attorney since 1981. His career also includes serving as a compliance officer with several national brokerage firms and as the director of financial planning quality assurance for the advisory division of an international insurance corporation. Finally, he is the creator of the Active Management Value Ratio™, a metric that allows investors, investment fiduciaries and attorneys to quickly and easi!y calculate the prudence of actively-managed mutual funds. OUTLINE What are the fiduciary responsibilities of the providers of a fiduciary plan?This falls within ERISA . . . help us understand thatCodification of Restatement of TrustsWhat was at issue in Hughes vs. Northwestern?What happens going forward in this case?With this ruling, there will be a big increase in scrutiny in the stewardship of these plans- what does this look like?Increase in cases (401K and 403B)- against 401K and 403B and BY plans vs advisers. (404A each investment must be prudent)Increase in discovery (and other issues like kickbacks?)Increase in costs for plans? Fewer providers? E&O Coverage +++Reduce cost of planReduce optionsMonitor planA change in the way investments and stewardship are analyzed and deemed appropriate?Menu doesn't work anymoreProof of a manager selection process?A new Cost/benefit analysis? (Actively Managed Value Ratio)Who could be liable? Plan Trustees? Investment Consultants? others?How could this spill over into other areas?Restatement 3rd Sec. 90 Prudent Investor RuleDiversificationCost-EfficiencyCase Law (Tibble et al . . . )Other trustees / fiduciaries?Personal trustsInvestment fiduciariesFoundationsActive vs Passive (Proliferation of cost benefit analysis- AMVR?)Investment consultants giving opinion letters?Private Investments?Intersection with SEC, FINRA other regulatory bodies? Prudent Investor Rule? LINKS: Hughes vs. Northwestern (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1401_m6io.pdf) Faegre Drinker Summary https://www.faegredrinker.com/en/insights/publications/2022/1/supreme-court-decides-hughes-v-northwestern-university Jim Watkins on Rick Ferri's Podcast https://www.podbean.com/ew/pb-k2fbd-1169847 How do we keep in touch? investsense.com. https://iainsight.wordpress.com/ Twitter: @investsense https://www.amazon.com/Wealth-Actually-Intelligent-Decision-Making-1-ebook/dp/B07FPQJJQT/
We've all heard the phrase you were given two ears and one mouth for a reason. On this episode we talk about active listening and the key to winning the war on focusing on the conversation. Do you spend more time formulating the response to your team in your head when you ask for an explanation? Do you have a preconceived idea and don't listen to the story? If so you are doing yourself and your team a huge disservice. As leaders we need to be locked into what someone is saying to be truly listening to what someone is saying instead of formulating our response or having a preconceived notion before the person talks. Restatement is the key to success, slow down and listen, when you reflect back to whoever you are talking to you are giving them, point one, two three of what you have hear. When you are actively listening you are giving the attention to the conversation that it deserves.With open ears and open minds, join in and comment on the conversation and discover if you are truly listening or are you formulating your response and missing the story.
Trespass to chattels is a tort whereby the infringing party has intentionally (or, in Australia, negligently) interfered with another person's lawful possession of a chattel (movable personal property). The interference can be any physical contact with the chattel in a quantifiable way, or any dispossession of the chattel (whether by taking it, destroying it, or barring the owner's access to it). As opposed to the greater wrong of conversion, trespass to chattels is argued to be actionable per se. The origin of the concept comes from the original writ of trespass de bonis asportatis. As in most other forms of trespass, remedy can only be obtained once it is proven that there was direct interference regardless of damage being done, and the infringing party has failed to disprove either negligence or intent. In some common-law countries, such as the United States and Canada, a remedy for trespass to chattels can only be obtained if the direct interference was sufficiently substantial to amount to dispossession, or alternatively where there had been an injury proximately related to the chattel. (Restatement (Second) of Torts, 1965.) United States law. The Restatement of Torts, Second § 217 defines trespass to chattels as "intentionally… dispossessing another of the chattel, or using or intermeddling with a chattel in the possession of another." Harm to personal property or diminution of its quality, condition or value as a result of a defendant's use can also result in liability under § 218(b) of the Restatement. Certain specific circumstances may lend themselves to liability for the action. The Restatement (Second) of Torts § 218 states further that: One who commits a trespass to a chattel is subject to liability to the possessor of the chattel if, but only if, a. he dispossesses the other of the chattel, or b. the chattel is impaired as to its condition, quality, or value, or c. the possessor is deprived of the use of the chattel for a substantial time, or d. bodily harm is caused to the possessor, or harm is caused to some person or thing in which the possessor has a legally protected interest. The trespass to chattels cause of action, frequently asserted in recent years against Internet advertisers and email spammers, is often included in complaints against spyware companies. These electronic messaging cases, and their progeny, which have cropped up over the last decade, will typically turn on the situations described in (b) or (d), and, as detailed below, the question of harm caused is a big issue. In sum, the basic elements of a claim of trespass to chattels are: 1) the lack of the plaintiff's consent to the trespass, 2) interference or intermeddling with possessory interest, and 3) the intentionality of the defendant's actions. Actual damage is not necessarily a required element of a trespass to chattels claim. Features of the claim. Lack of consent. A vendor can attempt to dispute a trespass claim on the grounds that the user consented to the terms of the contract. Even if consent was given for certain access, a user may still have a valid trespass to chattels complaint if the vendor has exceeded the contractual terms, if the contract is found to misrepresent the actual functioning of the product, or if the consent has been withdrawn. A vendor can be held liable for "any use exceeding the consent" given. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support
Trespass is an area of criminal law or tort law broadly divided into three groups: trespass to the person, trespass to chattels, and trespass to land. Trespass to the person historically involved six separate trespasses: threats, assault, battery, wounding, mayhem (or maiming), and false imprisonment. Through the evolution of the common law in various jurisdictions, and the codification of common law torts, most jurisdictions now broadly recognize three trespasses to the person: assault, which is "any act of such a nature as to excite an apprehension of battery"; battery, "any intentional and unpermitted contact with the plaintiff's person or anything attached to it and practically identified with it"; and false imprisonment, the "unlaw obstruct or deprive of freedom from restraint of movement". One can retrieve wounded or expired game from neighboring properties and boundaries even if the neighboring landowner does not give permission as long as there are no weapons in possession while retrieving game causes injury". Trespass to chattel does not require a showing of damages. Simply the "intermeddling with or use of … the personal property" of another gives cause of action for trespass. Since CompuServe Incorporated v Cyber Promotions, Inc., various courts have applied the principles of trespass to chattel to resolve cases involving unsolicited bulk e-mail and unauthorized server usage. Trespass to land is today the tort most commonly associated with the term trespass; it takes the form of "wrongful interference with one's possessory rights in property". Generally, it is not necessary to prove harm to a possessor's legally protected interest; liability for unintentional trespass varies by jurisdiction. "in common law, every unauthorized entry upon the soil of another was a trespasser"; however, under the tort scheme established by the Restatement of Torts, liability for unintentional intrusions arises only under circumstances evincing negligence or where the intrusion involved a highly dangerous activity. Trespass has also been treated as a common law offense in some countries. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support
Responsibility for criminal law and criminal justice in the United States is shared between the states and the federal government. Sources of law. The federal government and all the states rely on the following. Common law. Common law is law developed by judges through legal opinions, as opposed to statutes adopted through the legislative process or regulations issued by the executive branch. A common law crime is thus a crime which was originally defined by judges. Common law crimes no longer exist at the federal level, because of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in United States v Hudson and Goodwin, (1812). The validity of common law crimes varies at the state level. Although most states have abolished common law crimes, some have enacted "reception" statutes recognizing common law crimes when no similar statutory crime exists. Statutes. All 50 states have their own penal codes. Therefore, for any particular crime somewhere, it would be necessary to look it up in that jurisdiction. However, statutes derive from the common law. For example, if a state's murder statute does not define "human being," that state's courts will rely on the common-law definition. State vs. federal. The states, since they possess the police power, have the most general power to pass criminal laws in the United States. The federal government, since it can only exercise those powers granted to it by the Constitution, can only pass criminal laws which are related to the powers granted to Congress. For example, drug crimes, which comprise a large percentage of federal criminal cases, are subject to federal control because drugs are a commodity for which there is an interstate market, thus making controlled substances subject to regulation by Congress in the Controlled Substances Act which was passed under the authority of the Commerce Clause. Gonzales v Raich affirmed Congress's power to regulate drug possession under the Controlled Substances Act under the powers granted to it by the Commerce Clause. Model Penal Code. The Model Penal Code ("MPC") was created by the American Law Institute ("ALI") in 1962. In other areas of law, the ALI created Restatements of Law, usually referred to just as Restatements. For example, there is a Restatement of Contracts and a Restatement of Torts. The MPC is their equivalent for criminal law. Many states have wholly or largely adopted the MPC. Others have implemented it in part, and still others have not adopted any portion of it. However, even in jurisdictions where it has not been adopted, the MPC is often cited as persuasive authority in the same way that Restatements are in other areas of law. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support
Jingyi Jessica Li | Statistical Hypothesis Testing versus Machine Learning Binary Classification Jingyi Jessica Li (UCLA) discusses her paper "Statistical Hypothesis Testing versus Machine Learning Binary Classification". Jingyi noticed several high-impact cancer research papers using multiple hypothesis testing for binary classification problems. Concerned that these papers had no guarantee on their claimed false discovery rates, Jingyi wrote a perspective article about clarifying hypothesis testing and binary classification to scientists. #datascience #science #statistics 0:00 – Intro 1:50 – Motivation for Jingyi's article 3:22 – Jingyi's four concepts under hypothesis testing and binary classification 8:15 – Restatement of concepts 12:25 – Emulating methods from other publications 13:10 – Classification vs hypothesis test: features vs instances 21:55 - Single vs multiple instances 23:55 - Correlations vs causation 24:30 - Jingyi's Second and Third Guidelines 30:35 - Jingyi's Fourth Guideline 36:15 - Jingyi's Fifth Guideline 39:15 – Logistic regression: An inference method & a classification method 42:15 – Utility for students 44:25 – Navigating the multiple comparisons problem (again!) 51:25 – Right side, show bio-arxiv paper
Host Corrie Woods interviews fellow appellate attorneys Dan McLane and Tom Sanchez of Eckert Seamans to discuss Pittsburgh Logistics Sys., Inc. v. Beemac Trucking, LLC, a case in which the Court held unanimously that the Restatement test for no-hire/no-poach provisions ancillary to a services contract between two business entities governs in Pennsylvania and finding the subject no-hire/no-poach provision to be unenforceable. Show Notes:Justice Mundy's OpinionUnited States Department of Justice's "No-Poach Approach"Bloomberg Law SummaryRead more about Pittsburgh Logistics Sys., Inc. v. Beemac Trucking, LLC and all of SCOPA's cases on SCOPAblog.
A Video Explaining Wear and Tear and Inherent Vice https://zalma.com/blog Wear and Tear It is inevitable that objects deteriorate over time and wear out. Even the pyramids in Egypt show wear and tear after more than 4000 years being abused by sand and wind storms. Recent decisions of the courts of appeal have gone through such changes that even an inherent vice of the insured property—a condition certain to result in loss—rarely falls within the parameters of a non-fortuitous loss. The Restatement of Contracts 291, Comment a, holds that a loss is not fortuitous “if it results from an inherent defect in the object damaged, from ordinary wear and tear, or from the intentional misconduct of the insured.” In a case dealing with a boat that was left completely uncovered in the Bahamas during the rainy season, ‘normal wear and tear' resulted in the sinking of the boat. Rainwater entered the boat, forcing the bilge pump to operate continuously for several days. This drained the boat's battery, causing the pump to stop functioning. Batteries do not last forever. While the battery may have had enough power to start the engine, it obviously did not have enough power to operate the bilge pump for two days. The deterioration of a battery constitutes normal wear and tear, is not fortuitous, and is not compensable under a policy of insurance. We think it inappropriate to cause the insured to suffer a forfeiture by concluding, with the aid of hindsight, that no fortuitous loss occurred, when at the time the insurance took effect only a risk was involved as far as the parties were aware. See Millers Mutual Fire Insurance Co. v. Murrell, 362 S.W. 2d 868, 870 (Tex. Civ. App. 1962). De Guinee v. Insurance Co., 724 F. 2d 369 (3rd Cir. 12/22/1983). In Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee v. Insurance Company of North America, 724 F. 2d. 369 (3d Cir. 1983), an insured brought suit against its all-risk insurer to recover business interruption losses arising from the structural failure, collapse, and deformation of a tippler building and crusherhouse used in the mining of bauxite ore. The trial court found no coverage because the damage resulted from the defective design of the building and was not fortuitous. Latent Defect Cases that provide coverage despite an exclusion for latent defects fall generally within two categories. The court determines either that: "the defect could have been discovered through appropriate testing and it is therefore, not latent; or the loss resulted from a contributory covered risk." In Tzung v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 873 F.2d 1338 (9th Cir.1989), the court first held that damage due in part to inadequate protection against soil expansion was excluded under a policy exclusion for “faulty materials or workmanship.” Because the design and construction defects at issue in Tzung—described as “imbedded in the ground”—were discoverable only through expert examination of the apartment building “and the soils beneath it,” they were not “readily discoverable.” --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma/support
Welcome to Episode Eighty-Two of Lucretius Today. I am your host Cassius, and together with my panelists from the EpicureanFriends.com forum, we'll walk you through the six books of Lucretius' poem, and discuss how Epicurean philosophy can apply to you today. We encourage you to study Epicurus for yourself, and we suggest the best place to start is the book, "Epicurus and His Philosophy" by Canadian professor Norman DeWitt. For anyone who is not familiar with our podcast, please visit EpicureanFriends.com where you will find our goals and our ground rules. If you have any questions about those, please be sure to contact us at the forum for more information. In this Episode 82 we will read approximately Latin lines 1 through 67 as we open Book Six. Now let's join Don reading today's text.Browne 1743[01] Renowned Athens, first to wretched man gave the sweet fruits, and human life refreshed, and published laws; but comforts nobler far than these she gave, when to the world she showed great Epicurus, formed with such a soul; who from his mouth delivered sublime truths, as from an oracle, whose fame for so divine discoveries dispersed every way abroad and was raised after death above the skies.[09] For when he saw how little would suffice for necessary use, and by what small provisions life might be preserved; that Nature had prepared every thing ready to support mankind; that men abounded with wealth, and were loaded with honor and applause, and happy in their private concerns, in the good character of their children, and yet their minds were restless at home, complaining and lamenting the misery of their condition; he perceived the vessel itself (the mind) was the cause of the calamity, and by the corruption of that, every thing, though ever so good, that was poured into it was tainted: it was full of holes, and run out, and so could never by any means by filled; and whatever it received within, it infected with a stinking smell. And therefore he purged the mind by true philosophy, and set bounds to our desires and our fears. He laid open to us the chief good, that point of happiness we all aim at, in what it consists, and showed us the direct way that leads to it, and puts us into the straight road to obtain it. He taught what misfortunes commonly attend human life, whether they flow from the laws of nature or from chance, whether from necessity or by accident; and by what means we are to oppose those evils, and strive against them. And he has fully proved that men torment themselves in vain, and are tossed about in a tempestuous ocean of cares to no purpose. For as boys tremble and fear every thing in the dark night, so we in open day fear things as vain, and little to be dreaded, as those that children quake at in the dark. and fancy advancing towards them. This terror of the mind, this darkness then, not the Sun's beams nor the bright rays of day can scatter, but the light of nature and the rules of reason; and therefore I shall the more readily proceed to execute what I have begun.[43] And since I taught the fabric of the world was mortal, and that the heavens are formed of corruptible seeds, and whatever they do, or ever will contain, must necessarily be dissolved; attend now to what remains, especially since the hope of carrying the prize has encouraged me to ascend the chariot and engage in so noble a race; and since the difficulties that once attended the course are removed, and the roughness of the way is made favorable and easy. The various wonders men behold in the earth and in the heavens perplex their minds, trembling and in suspense, and make them humble with the fear of the gods, and press them groveling to the ground; and being ignorant of the cause of these events, they are forced to confess the sovereignty and give up everything to the command of these deities. And the effects they are unable to account for by reason they imagine were brought about by the influence of the gods; for such as well know that the gods lead a life of tranquility and ease, if they should still wonder by what power the world is carried on, especially in the the things they see over their heads in the heavens above, they relapse again into their old superstition; they raise over themselves a set of cruel tyrants who, the wretches fancy, can do all things, because they know nothing of what can or what cannot be, or by what means a finite power is fixed to every being, and a boundary immovable which it cannot pass. Such are more liable to mistakes and to be carried widely from the right way.
Society of Petroleum Engineers - Gulf Coast Section (SPE-GCS)
In this episode Marty Stetzer (President of EKT Interactive in Houston) talks with Deb Ryan, Head Low Carbon Market Analytics at S&P Global Platts about oil and gas sustainability reporting. How will emission targets and regulations impact reserve values? ---------------- Feedback is welcome, along with ideas for topics you would like to see us cover in future podcasts, fill out the short form You can also send your feedback to thespegcspodcast@spegcs.org Make sure to subscribe and follow on Apple Podcast, Podbean, and Spotify to get the latest episodes. ---------------- If you want to learn more about the SPE Gulf Coast Section, go to www.spegcs.org. You can access recorded webinars in the on-demand library and contribute to the Scholarship Endowment Fund (SEF) If you are not an SPE member and would like to join, visit www.SPE.org/join and enjoy all the SPE membership benefits.
Thanks for listening to the SPE-GCS Podcast Channel on the EKT Interactive Oil and Gas Podcast Network. Transcript In this episode Marty Stetzer (President of EKT Interactive in Houston) talks with Deb Ryan, Head Low Carbon Market Analytics at S&P Global Platts about oil and gas sustainability reporting. How will emission targets and regulations impact […] The post "Restatement of Reserves" featuring Deb Ryan appeared first on EKT Interactive.
The TransUnion v. Ramirez decision from the U.S. Supreme Court is likely to have massive implications for standing for class certification and class actions, and potentially for the en banc petition seeking a rehearing on the panel opinion issued in Hunstein v. Preferred Collection & Mgmt. Servs. Inc. In the 5-4 opinion written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the court held that the class in the case did not have standing to sue—only the original plaintiff, Sergio Ramirez. Justices Clarence Thomas, Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan dissent on the opinion, ACA International previously reported.On this episode of ACA Cast, Jason Tompkins and Jonathan Hoffmann, partners at Balch & Bingham LLP, talk with ACA Director of Education Kelli Krueger about the implications of the Supreme Court's decision on other case law and at the state level.They also reference a footnote in the court's opinion:For the first time in this court, the plaintiffs also argue that TransUnion “published” the class members' information internally—for example, to employees within TransUnion and to the vendors that printed and sent the mailings that the class members received. That new argument is forfeited. In any event, it is unavailing. Many American courts did not traditionally recognize intra-company disclosures as actionable publications for purposes of the tort of defamation. See, e.g., Chalkley v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 150 Va. 301, 326–328, 143 S. E. 631, 638–639 (1928). Nor have they necessarily recognized disclosures to printing vendors as actionable publications. See, e.g., Mack v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 639 Fed. Appx. 582, 586 (CA11 2016). Moreover, even the plaintiffs' cited cases require evidence that the defendant actually “brought an idea to the perception of another,” Restatement of Torts Section 559, Comment a, p. 140 (1938), the defendant actually “brought an idea to the perception of another,” Restatement of Torts Section 559, Comment a, p. 140 (1938), and thus generally require evidence that the document was actually read and not merely processed, cf. Ostrowe v. Lee, 256 N. Y. 36, 38–39, 175 N. E. 505, 505–506 (1931) (Cardozo, C. J.).That evidence is lacking here. In short, the plaintiffs' internal publication theory circumvents a fundamental requirement of an ordinary defamation claim—publication—and does not bear a sufficiently “close relationship” to the traditional defamation tort to qualify for Article III standing.Contact ACA Cast host, ACA Director of Education Kelli Krueger, at krueger@acainternational.org or Member Services at memberservices@acainternational.org if you have a podcast idea for ACA Cast.Support the show (http://www.acainternational.org)
49 Organizational citizen behavior Learn about both basic and niche topics in Work and Organizational Psychology in less than five minutes a week. If you are an HR professional, you will get inspired to explore new areas beyond recruiting and payroll. If you are a CEO or entrepreneur, you will get an overview on the applied science of human factors at work. Psychologist, author and consultant from Hamburg /Germany (*1979). Married, two sons. MA in psychology from the University of Hamburg. More than 14 years of experience teaching psychology as well as a consultant for UNICEF, Terre des Hommes, IOM, the EU and private companies. Podcasts in 21 languages. References: Organ, D. W. (1988). A Restatement of the Satisfaction-Performance Hypothesis. Journal of Management, 14(4), 547-57. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107-142. Smith, A., Organ D. W., & Near J. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653-663. Contact gerhard.j.ohrband@gmail.com https://thegomethod.org/ On Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gerhard-j%C3%B6rg-ohrband-22525147/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/JOhrband We are proud to have made it into the Top 5 of Industrial and Organizational Psychology podcasts: https://blog.feedspot.com/industrial_organizational_psychology_podcasts/ If you want to discover my secrets for learning more than 21 languages, please check out my book “The GO Method” on Amazon. Benefit from a free webinar: https://www.thegomethod.org/services/free/ Intro music: Josef Liebeskind - Symphony No. 1 in A minor, Op. 4.The recording is in the public domain. Listen hereto the entire composition.
49 Organizational citizen behavior Learn about both basic and niche topics in Work and Organizational Psychology in less than five minutes a week. If you are an HR professional, you will get inspired to explore new areas beyond recruiting and payroll. If you are a CEO or entrepreneur, you will get an overview on the applied science of human factors at work. Psychologist, author and consultant from Hamburg /Germany (*1979). Married, two sons. MA in psychology from the University of Hamburg. More than 14 years of experience teaching psychology as well as a consultant for UNICEF, Terre des Hommes, IOM, the EU and private companies. Podcasts in 21 languages. References: Organ, D. W. (1988). A Restatement of the Satisfaction-Performance Hypothesis. Journal of Management, 14(4), 547-57. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107-142. Smith, A., Organ D. W., & Near J. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653-663. Contact gerhard.j.ohrband@gmail.com https://thegomethod.org/ On Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gerhard-j%C3%B6rg-ohrband-22525147/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/JOhrband We are proud to have made it into the Top 5 of Industrial and Organizational Psychology podcasts: https://blog.feedspot.com/industrial_organizational_psychology_podcasts/ If you want to discover my secrets for learning more than 21 languages, please check out my book “The GO Method” on Amazon. Benefit from a free webinar: https://www.thegomethod.org/services/free/ Intro music: Josef Liebeskind - Symphony No. 1 in A minor, Op. 4.The recording is in the public domain. Listen hereto the entire composition.
49 Organizational citizen behavior Learn about both basic and niche topics in Work and Organizational Psychology in less than five minutes a week. If you are an HR professional, you will get inspired to explore new areas beyond recruiting and payroll. If you are a CEO or entrepreneur, you will get an overview on the applied science of human factors at work. Psychologist, author and consultant from Hamburg /Germany (*1979). Married, two sons. MA in psychology from the University of Hamburg. More than 14 years of experience teaching psychology as well as a consultant for UNICEF, Terre des Hommes, IOM, the EU and private companies. Podcasts in 21 languages. References: Organ, D. W. (1988). A Restatement of the Satisfaction-Performance Hypothesis. Journal of Management, 14(4), 547-57. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107-142. Smith, A., Organ D. W., & Near J. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653-663. Contact gerhard.j.ohrband@gmail.com https://thegomethod.org/ On Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gerhard-j%C3%B6rg-ohrband-22525147/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/JOhrband We are proud to have made it into the Top 5 of Industrial and Organizational Psychology podcasts: https://blog.feedspot.com/industrial_organizational_psychology_podcasts/ If you want to discover my secrets for learning more than 21 languages, please check out my book “The GO Method” on Amazon. Benefit from a free webinar: https://www.thegomethod.org/services/free/ Intro music: Josef Liebeskind - Symphony No. 1 in A minor, Op. 4.The recording is in the public domain. Listen hereto the entire composition.
49 Organizational citizen behavior Learn about both basic and niche topics in Work and Organizational Psychology in less than five minutes a week. If you are an HR professional, you will get inspired to explore new areas beyond recruiting and payroll. If you are a CEO or entrepreneur, you will get an overview on the applied science of human factors at work. Psychologist, author and consultant from Hamburg /Germany (*1979). Married, two sons. MA in psychology from the University of Hamburg. More than 14 years of experience teaching psychology as well as a consultant for UNICEF, Terre des Hommes, IOM, the EU and private companies. Podcasts in 21 languages. References: Organ, D. W. (1988). A Restatement of the Satisfaction-Performance Hypothesis. Journal of Management, 14(4), 547-57. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107-142. Smith, A., Organ D. W., & Near J. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653-663. Contact gerhard.j.ohrband@gmail.com https://thegomethod.org/ On Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/gerhard-j%C3%B6rg-ohrband-22525147/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/JOhrband We are proud to have made it into the Top 5 of Industrial and Organizational Psychology podcasts: https://blog.feedspot.com/industrial_organizational_psychology_podcasts/ If you want to discover my secrets for learning more than 21 languages, please check out my book “The GO Method” on Amazon. Benefit from a free webinar: https://www.thegomethod.org/services/free/ Intro music: Josef Liebeskind - Symphony No. 1 in A minor, Op. 4.The recording is in the public domain. Listen hereto the entire composition.
What is the difference between an amendment to your trust and a restatement of you trust? If you need to update your trust (most people have to update it as their lives change), you might need a simple amendment or a complete restatement. What's the difference? Watch to learn more. -- I love helping people and make these podcasts to help non-lawyers learn a little more about legal concepts. I'd appreciate it if you take a second to let me know what you thought of the podcast and if you learned something, please hit the subscribe button, rate and review! It helps other people access the podcast too. -- If you want to talk more about estate planning: https://www.amandarochalaw.com/click-estate-planning If you want to talk more about probate: https://www.amandarochalaw.com/click-probate -- Estate Planning and Probate is all we do. If you want someone who is honest, diligent, and compassionate, you've come to the right place. Amanda Rocha is the owner of Law Office of Amanda L. Rocha. She created it with one goal - help YOU live a great life and leave a great legacy. You'll find information here on estate planning, probate, revocable living trusts, irrevocable trusts, life insurance trusts, charitable giving, wills, trusts, power of attorney, medical power of attorney, trustee selection, and everything in between. -- Instagram = https://www.instagram.com/amandarochalaw Facebook = https://www.facebook.com/amandarochalaw Podcast = https://www.amandarochalaw.com/podcast *Attorney advertising. For educational purposes; no guarantees are made with this video or text.
In today's episode, Rick and Sam are joined by Mary Rasenberger, CEO of the Authors Guild and Authors Guild Foundation, to discuss freedom of expression in the context of book publishing, the internet age and our civil society. We discuss the importance of defending intellectual property rights, the demand for a healthy civil discourse, and the need for freedom of expression even when we disagree. Mary Rasenberger is the CEO of the Authors Guild (authorsguild.org) and Authors Guild Foundation. Prior to joining the Guild in November 2014, Mary practiced law for over 25 years in roles that spanned private practice, the government and corporate sector, as a recognized expert in copyright and media law. From 2002 to 2008 Mary worked for the U.S. Copyright Office and Library of Congress as senior policy advisor and program director for the National Digital Preservation Program. Immediately prior to coming to the Guild in late 2014, Mary was a partner at Cowan, DeBaets, Abrahams & Sheppard, and previously Counsel at Skadden Arps, where she counseled and litigated on behalf of publishing, media, entertainment, and internet companies, as well as authors and other creators, in all areas of copyright and related rights. Earlier in her career, Mary worked at other major New York law firms and for a major record company. Mary is a frequent speaker, lecturer and writer on copyright law and authors' rights. She is on the Council of the American Bar Association's Intellectual Property Section; an Advisor to the Executive Committee of the Copyright Society of the USA; a founder of Copyright Awareness Week, and an Adviser to the American Law Institute's Restatement of Law, Copyright. Mary received her J.D. from Harvard Law School, an M.A. in Philosophy from Boston College, and her B.A. from Barnard College. Sam Scinta is President and Founder of IM Education, a non-profit, and Lecturer in Political Science at University of Wisconsin-La Crosse and Viterbo University. Rick Kyte is Endowed Professor and Director of the DB Reinhart Institute for Ethics in Leadership at Viterbo University. Music compliments of Bobby Bridger- “Rendezvous” from "A Ballad of the West"
You are probably wondering, first, how do you possibly make a full episode out of retirement plan document restatements and other related topics, and second, how do you make it interesting? Well, when you have Alison Cohen, ERISA Attorney and Partner at the Ferenczy Benefits Law Center, it is a piece of cake! Not much description need on this one, but plenty of good nuggets of info and best practices. Also, Alison mentioned a "Record Retention Policy Statement" which you can find a link to in the show notes. Before we get started, if you have been enjoying the podcast please leave a review or rating on your favorite podcast service or app. That feeds the crazy algorithms and helps more people find the podcast. Guest Bio Alison is a Partner with Ferenczy Benefits Law Center in Atlanta, Georgia. She advises clients on many issues related to qualified retirement plans, including design, mergers and acquisitions, audits, and operational issues. Alison commonly works with clients that have operational issues to guide them through the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and/or Department of Labor (DOL) corrective programs, prepare corrective filings, and prepare and support clients through an audit conducted by the IRS and/or DOL. Alison is a member of the Georgia and California State Bars. Prior to joining Ferenczy Benefits Law Center, Alison worked at a large bundled service provider for nearly 16 years as an Associate Vice President, Compliance Manager and Regulatory Liaison. As part of her responsibilities there, Alison served as a national speaker on audit and correction issues. She served on the Employee Plans Subcommittee of the IRS Advisory Committee on Tax-Exempt and Governmental Entities (ACT). Alison has been actively involved with the National Institute of Pension Administration (NIPA) serving as a speaker, author, and developer/teacher, and received NIPA’s Excellence in Education Award in 2019. The award recognizes outstanding educators within the national membership who have made significant contributions and improvements to NIPA’s educational programs. She holds designations as an Accredited Pension Administrator (APA) and Accredited Pension Representative (APR) from NIPA. Alison is also the current President of the Pension Education Council of Atlanta. In 2019, Alison assumed co-authorship of “ERISA: A Comprehensive Guide,” along with Ilene H. Ferenczy. 401(k) Fridays Podcast Overview Struggling with a fiduciary issue, looking for strategies to improve employee retirement outcomes or curious about the impact of current events on your retirement plan? We've had conversations with retirement industry leaders to address these and other relevant topics! You can easily explore over 200 prior on-demand audio interviews here. Don't forget to subscribe as we release a new episode each Friday!
Intentional Acts Exclusions and Fortuity https://zalma.com/blog Implicit in the concept of insurance is that the loss occur as a result of a fortuitous event not one planned, intended, or anticipated. Oddly, the fortuity principle never appears in insurance contracts. The principle is rooted in common law and in the statutes of at least six states. The fortuity principle has the effect of an exclusion. That is, an all-risk policy might provide coverage for all risks minus named exclusions, but never provides coverage for non-fortuitous events, even though non-fortuitous events are not named exclusions in the policy. For this reason, the fortuity principle is sometimes called the unnamed exclusion. A fortuitous event is an event which so far as the parties to the contract are aware, is dependent on chance. It may be beyond the power of any human being to bring the event to pass; it may be within the control of third persons; it may even be a past event, such as the loss of a vessel, provided that the fact is unknown to the parties. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 724 F.2d 369,372 (3d Cir. 1983) (quoting Restatement of Contracts § 291 cmt. A (1932)) “The purpose behind the fortuity doctrine applies with full force where a party attempts to purchase insurance against the consequences of his own ongoing wrongful conduct.” (Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Travis, Court of Appeal of Texas, 68 S.W.3d 72 (2001)) Judge Cardozo, in 1923, stated a simple and obvious rule of law that “no one shall be permitted to take advantage of his own wrong. [Messersmith v. American Fidelity Co., 232 N.Y. 161, 133 N.E. 432 (1921).] California, by statute, covers has codified Cardozo's statement. Almost every insurance policy issued in the US excludes the intentional acts of the insured. Those that do not are covered by the public policy adopted by most states. To insure against wrongful acts would be to allow people to act wrongfully with no adverse effect since their victims would be compensated by insurance. © 2021 – Barry Zalma Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE, now limits his practice to service as an insurance consultant specializing in insurance coverage, insurance claims handling, insurance bad faith and insurance fraud almost equally for insurers and policyholders. He also serves as an arbitrator or mediator for insurance related disputes. He practiced law in California for more than 44 years as an insurance coverage and claims handling lawyer and more than 52 years in the insurance business. He is available at http://www.zalma.com and zalma@zalma.com. Mr. Zalma is the first recipient of the first annual Claims Magazine/ACE Legend Award. Over the last 53 years Barry Zalma has dedicated his life to insurance, insurance claims and the need to defeat insurance fraud. He has created the following library of books and other materials to make it possible for insurers and their claims staff to become insurance claims professionals. Go to the podcast Zalma On Insurance at https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma; Follow Mr. Zalma on Twitter at https://twitter.com/bzalma; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/c/c-262921; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://zalma.com/blog/insurance-claims-library/ Read posts from Barry Zalma at https://parler.com/profile/Zalma/posts; and the last two issues of ZIFL at https://zalma.com/zalmas-insurance-fraud-letter-2/ podcast now available at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/zalma-on-insurance/id1509583809?uo=4 --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma/support
Follow Dan on LinkedIn at linkedin.com/in/cotterdan Follow Pat on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/donald-patrick-eckler-69880814/ Follow the show at: https://www.linkedin.com/company/podium-and-panel-podcast Predictions Sure To Go Wrong: Bycor: Affirm Blackford" Affirm Reece: Affirm Oral arguments in Brycor v. Alexander can be found here: http://content.ilight.net/supremecourt/04222021_1100am.mp3 Oral arguments in Teresa Blackford v. Welborn Clinic can be found here: https://mycourts.in.gov/arguments/default.aspx?&id=2545&view=detail&yr=&when=&page=1&court=sup&search=&direction=%20ASC&future=False&sort=&judge=&county=&admin=False&pageSize=20 The Indiana Business Trust Act is here: https://law.justia.com/codes/indiana/2011/title23/article5/chapter1/ Oral arguments in Reece v. Tyson can be found here: https://mycourts.in.gov/arguments/default.aspx?&id=2547&view=detail&yr=&when=&page=1&court=sup&search=&direction=%20ASC&future=False&sort=&judge=&county=&admin=False&pageSize=20 Past's post on the appellate court decision in Reece can be found here: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/donald-patrick-eckler-69880814_reece-v-tyson-activity-6709015892451217408-PvEX/ Pat's LinkedIn post with the decision in Midwest can be found here: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6793848886453710848/?updateEntityUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afs_feedUpdate%3A%28V2%2Curn%3Ali%3Aactivity%3A6793848886453710848%29 The Phil Luckett coin toss is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zki61ZmKf4U My column on the Restatement of Liability Insurance is here: https://www.pretzel-stouffer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/When-Reasonable-is-Unreasonable.pdf --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app
Have you ever wondered what exactly goes into completing an ALI project? There’s nobody better to talk about the ALI process than four veteran Reporters whose projects may be completed at the 2021 Annual Meeting. In this episode of Reasonably Speaking, Reporter on one of our newest projects, Lyrissa Lidsky from Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Defamation and Privacy will moderate the panel of Matthew L.M. Fletcher (American Indian Law), Geoffrey P. Miller (Compliance and Enforcement for Organizations), Kenneth W. Simons (Intentional Torts), and Christiane C. Wendehorst (Principles for a Data Economy), as they discuss their journey from project conception to ALI member approval and completion. They will discuss how they came to be an ALI Reporter, how they work with project Advisers and ALI members, the draft approval process, surprises they learned along the way, and more.
Hosts Mike Stover and George Bachrach delve into a review of the Restatement of the Law, Third of Suretyship and Guarantee, what it contains, and how it can useful to you. Find us on Spotify | iTunes | Stitcher | PodBean | Amazon Music Visit the Surety Today page to see previous telebriefings.
Exclusions to Coverage for Construction Defects https://zalma.com/blog Implicit in the concept of insurance is that the loss occur as a result of a fortuitous event not one planned, intended, or anticipated. Oddly, the fortuity principle never appears in insurance contracts. The principle is rooted in common law and in the statutes of at least six states. The fortuity principle has the effect of an exclusion. That is, an all-risk policy might provide coverage for all risks minus named exclusions, but never provides coverage for non-fortuitous events, even though non-fortuitous events are not named exclusions in the policy. For this reason, the fortuity principle is sometimes called the unnamed exclusion. A fortuitous event is an event which so far as the parties to the contract are aware, is dependent on chance. It may be beyond the power of any human being to bring the event to pass; it may be within the control of third persons; it may even be a past event, such as the loss of a vessel, provided that the fact is unknown to the parties. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 724 F.2d 369,372 (3d Cir. 1983) (quoting Restatement of Contracts § 291 cmt. A (1932)) The purpose behind the fortuity doctrine applies with full force where a party attempts to purchase insurance against the consequences of his own ongoing wrongful conduct.” (Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Travis, Court of Appeal of Texas, 68 S.W.3d 72 (2001)) Intentional Acts Exclusions Judge Cardozo, in 1923, stated a simple and obvious rule of law that “no one shall be permitted to take advantage of his own wrong. {Messersmith v. American Fidelity Co., 232 N.Y. 161, 133 N.E. 432 (1921).] California, by statute, covers has codified Cardozo's statement. Almost every insurance policy issued in the US excludes the intentional acts of the insured. Those that do not are covered by the public policy adopted by most states. To insure against wrongful acts would be to allow people to act wrongfully with no adverse effect since their victims would be compensated by insurance. Insurance involves the transfer of the risk of possible losses from the policyholder to the insurer. It is not available for losses that the policyholder knows of, plans, intends, or is aware are substantially certain to occur. Insurers faced with a construction defect claim may attempt to exclude coverage by claiming that the insured intended to build a defective structure. This is not a wise option to exercise unless the insurer has clear and convincing evidence of such intent. © 2021 – Barry Zalma Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE, --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma/support
A bedrock principle for mediation is its confidentiality. Arguments made at mediation are typically not admissible in court. Nationally renowed mediator, Jeff Kichaven, has been virtually touring the country presenting a provocative theme: your mediation might not be confidential. Jeff tells Steve that whether a mediation is confidential is determined by the court hearing an attack on confidentiality and if it is a different forum from where the mediation took place, which Restatement that…
Brendan and Andrew take a new look at Raya Dunayevskaya’s 1944 polemic, “A Restatement of Some Fundamentals of Marxism Against Carter’s Vulgarization.” (https://www.marxisthumanistinitiative.org/a-restatement-of-some-fundamentals-of-marxism-against-carters-vulgarization-2) They explore its relevance to vulgarizations of Marxism that we confront today, which identify surface manifestations of capitalism as the system’s essence. The discussion also situates Dunayevskaya’s contribution within its political-theoretical context—a debate over whether Stalinist Russia was a bureaucratic collectivist or a state-capitalist society. Joseph Carter, a leading Workers Party theorist and proponent of the former view, argued that Russia could not be capitalist because it was not dominated by the “drive for the capitalists for profits,” which he took to be the driving force of capitalist accumulation. It was this claim, especially, that Dunayevskaya regarded as a vulgarization of Marxism. The episode’s current-events segment is on the Trumpites’ violent insurrection of January 6 to overturn the voters’ will and keep Trump in power, including the economic-populist spin on the coup put forward by David Sirota in Jacobin. (https://jacobinmag.com/2021/01/capitol-building-storming-far-right-election) * ~ * ~ * ~ * Radio Free Humanity is a podcast covering news, politics and philosophy from a Marxist-Humanist perspective. It is co-hosted by Brendan Cooney and Andrew Kliman. We intend to release new episodes every two weeks. Radio Free Humanity is sponsored by Marxist-Humanist Initiative (MHI), but the views expressed by the co-hosts and guests of Radio Free Humanity are their own. They do not necessarily reflect the views and positions of MHI. We welcome and encourage listeners’ comments, posted on this episode’s page of the MHI website. Please visit MHI’s website for information on philosophy & organization, Marxist-Humanist archives, and its online publication, “With Sober Senses”: https://www.marxisthumanistinitiative.org/
Ary Rosenbaum (The Rosenbaum Law Firm P.C.) talks about the Cycle 3 Restatement Process and the impact on plan sponsors. Check that401ksite.com for further information on That 401(k) National Virtual Conference on January 21-22, 2021.
The treatment of the children in two distinct areas of the law – child welfare and juvenile justice – is fraught with difficulty even under the best of circumstances. But with the onslaught of the COVID pandemic, the regular challenges and the need to protect children have only been compounded.In this episode of Reasonably Speaking, juvenile justice scholar and Chief Reporter of the Restatement of the Law, Children and the Law, Elizabeth Scott guides our Children and the Law-exclusive panel through a series of discussions centering on child advocacy and juvenile law during a pandemic. The panel explores how the law defines parental authority, what rights a child has in custody, how lawyers can best represent a child in the system during a pandemic, and more.Panelists:Kristin Henning, Georgetown University Law CenterClare Huntington, Fordham University School of LawMarsha Levick, Juvenile Law Center
(1:40) - Start of interview(2:10) - David's "origin story"(3:44) - His start with Wilson Sonsini in 1989.(6:11) - His experience serving as a board member, and why he thinks corporate America has lost out on having lawyers as directors. His for corporate boards have included California Culinary Academy, and currently LTSE.(7:41) - His take on the Long Term Stock Exchange.(9:47) - His thoughts on why companies should list on the LTSE ("the market is wide open").(11:03) - His take and role as an Advisor to the American Law Institute's Restatement of Corporate Governance.(13:22) - His take on the Business Roundtable Restatement of the Purpose of the Corporation (2019) (14:05) - Some historical context for purpose of corporation debate (stakeholders vs stockholder primacy).(16:49) - His advocacy in favor of dual-class stock.(20:27) - His dislike of time-based sunset provisions, as proposed by CII ("one-size-fits-all sunset provision").(24:42) - His take on distinguishing dual-class stock and a listing on the LTSE.(25:55) - His view on tenure-voting.(28:52) - His take on duties of directors in VC-backed companies in conflicted situations, since the Trados case.(32:14) - The governance risks that he sees with the emergence of SPACs in 2020.(34:53) - His take on the soaring stock market and the current tech boom.(36:34) - His thoughts on WFH after pandemic and how it has impacted law firms and other sectors.(37:47) - His take on shareholder activism this year, and what's next (activity will pick up in spring 2021). His advice for companies and boards is to think about long term plans:Economic message: growth plan for the long term must be communicated early and often to stockholders.Governance message: focus on diversity at all levels, especially at the board level.Public message: stakeholder and ESG concerns.(44:06) - His take on California's SB-876 and AB-979 laws and the future of boardroom diversity.(46:49) - Next big issues for boards and directors:GlobalizationMeasuring externalities (such as carbon emissions).(48:18) - His favorite books:The Invisible Man, by Ralph Ellison (1952)In Search of Lost Time, by Marcel Proust (1913-1927)The Diary of Anne Frank, by Anne Frank (1947)Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, by Robert Pirsig (1974)(49:34) - Some of his mentors:Wallace Fowlie (at Duke).Bruce Payne (Ethics)Larry Sonsini (WSGR)(50:59) - His favorite quote:"Some men see things as they are, and ask why. I dream of things that never were, and ask why not" by Bobby Kennedy.(51:27) - His "unusual habit" that he loves the most:Elephants. His true passion is wildlife conservation.(53:51) - The living people he most admires:Jane GoodallIain Douglas HamiltonDavid Berger specializes in corporate governance and M&A litigation as well as rapid response shareholder activism and corporate governance risk oversight. David’s practice is an unusual blend of corporate governance advisory work and litigation, and he is nationally recognized for his expertise in both the boardroom and the courtroom. David also represents directors and companies in internal investigations and public companies on disclosure and SEC proceedings.Follow Evan on Twitter @evanepsteinMusic/Soundtrack (found via Free Music Archive): Seeing The Future by Dexter Britain is licensed under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License
This episode covers choice of law in contract cases under the first choice of law restatement! --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app
Negligent entrustment is a cause of action in tort law that arises where one party (the entrustor) is held liable for negligence because they negligently provided another party (the entrustee) with a dangerous instrumentality, and the entrusted party caused injury to a third party with that instrumentality. The cause of action most frequently arises where one person allows another to drive their automobile. Quasi-tort is a legal term that is sometimes used to describe unusual tort actions, on the basis of a legal doctrine that some legal duty exists which cannot be classified strictly as negligence in a personal duty resulting in a tort nor as a contractual duty resulting in a breach of contract, but rather some other kind of duty recognizable by the law. It has been used, for example, to describe a tort for strict liability arising out of product liability, although this is typically simply called a 'tort'. Although it is not to be found in most legal dictionaries, it has been used by some scholars such as Sri Lankan Lakshman Marasinghe. Lakshman proposes that the doctrine provides legal relief that falls outside tort or contract, but with some of the characteristics of tort or contract, as can be found in restitution (including unjust enrichment), equity (including unconscionable conduct), beneficiaries under a trust of the benefit of a promise, people protected by the valid assignment of promise, fiduciary duty, and contracts of insurance. An ultrahazardous activity in the common law of torts is one that is so inherently dangerous that a person engaged in such an activity can be held strictly liable for injuries caused to another person, even if the person engaged in the activity took every reasonable precaution to prevent others from being injured. In the Restatement of the Law 2d, Torts 2d, the term has been abandoned in favor of the phrase "inherently dangerous activity." --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support
Start of interview [1:06]Kerrie's "origin story" [1:34]Her initiation on corporate governance matters with the UK Institute of Directors (IoD) (2000-2004) [3:49]Her take on corporate director education and training [5:42]Her role at the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) (2005-2008) [7:43]Her transition to the International Corporate Governance Network (ICGN) (2008-Present) [9:49]History and mission of ICGN [11:56]. It was established in 1995, it has grow to over 800 members from 43 countries, (~70% of members are based in North America and Europe, ~20% in Asia). These members represent ~US$54 trillion of AUM. ICGN Global Governance PrinciplesICGN Global Stewardship PrinciplesEngagement with regulators (they send ~20-25 engagement letters to regulators per year). "ICGN brings a global investor flavor to national issues."The concept of "investor stewardship" and its evolution over time [15:27]The Cadbury Report (1992)The UK Stewardship Code (2010)The European Shareholder Rights Directive II (SRDII) (2020).Recently, UK and Japan have expanded stewardship principles beyond equity to all asset classes (Japan Stewardship Code, 2020)Her take on the debate of the purpose of the corporation (shareholder primacy vs stakeholders) [20:36]Business Roundtable's Statement on the purpose of the corporation (2019)Europe's Consultation on Sustainable Corporate Governance (2020)Section 172 of the UK Companies Act (2006)CII's statement opposing the BRT's 2019 Restatement ("accountability to everyone means accountability to no one")On the rise of ESG [26:47] "[I think] ESG has grown from a deeper understanding of stewardship since 2008... I would take away the G [since we've always been focused on governance] so really what we have witnessed is the rise of E and S... and this year COVID has shifted the narrative particularly around the S." For example, ICGN members have focused on "human capital management":Health and safetyStaff training due to WFHIncome inequality, pay.Many ICGN members have formed the "Human Capital Management Coalition" which has been engaging with the SEC, resulting in new disclosure rules involving human capital resources [28:49]Her take on climate change [29:31]ICGN is calling for ESG reporting on an international scale to address climate change.Many ICGN members are calling for Task Force on Climate-Related Disclosure (TCFD) frameworkNZ is the first country in the world to make climate reporting compulsory with TCFD.Her take on diversity [32:38]Focus on disclosure of diversity policies.Measurable targets, goals and time periods.Boards should disclose skills matrix. "For me, one of the biggest barriers of board diversity is director tenure, 'zombie directors', we need to have a policy of board refreshment and board evaluation." "There is still a problem surrounding the 'old boys network', the 'male, pale and stale crew.'"Her take on Big Tech [39:14]She's worried about the "covert behavioral manipulative algorithms that are gradually changing the way we think, feel and act." (for example, as described in The Social Dilemma documentary)ICGN has not weighed into this issue. From a governance perspective many ICGN members cannot influence these companies due to dual-class share structures that make them less accountable to shareholders (ICGN advocates for a "one share one vote" structure)."The U.S. also has weaker data privacy regulations than Europe, and that's a problem."Her parting thoughts for directors "investors are your allies" [44:34]Her favorite books: [49:27]Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now, (2018) by Jaron Lanier (this is the book that she's currently reading)Factfulness, (2018) by Hans Rosling.Corporate Governance and Chairmanship, (2002) by Sir Adrian Cadbury.Her professional mentor: [46:45]Anne Simpson, currently at CalPERS.His favorite quotes: [47:50]"You can’t go back and change the beginning, but you can start from where you are and change the ending.” (C.S. Lewis)"Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” (Dr. Seus, The Lorax).Her unusual habit [48:53]The living person she most admires [49:43]David AttenboroughJacinda ArdernMusic/Soundtrack (found via Free Music Archive): Seeing The Future by Dexter Britain is licensed under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License
Silver Linings, Episode 6 from October 11, 2020 Big Idea: "God’s designs will not be derailed." Matthew 19:1-10 by Michael Lockstampfor (@miklocks) OutlineMarriage is a male/female arrangement. Marriage is a two-person arrangement. Marriage is designed to be permanent. Marriage is designed to be the location for sexuality.Additional resources:Read Matthew 19:1-10Good News Church Marriage SermonsCreation Account (Genesis 1:26-27 & Genesis 2:18-24)Restatement of the creation precedent (Jeremiah 29:4-7)Marriage has theological implications (Ephesians 5:22-33)Audio LinksVisit our WebsiteWatch the video on YoutubeFollow our InstagramLike us on FacebookMusic by Blue Dot SessionsImages courtesy of UnsplashVideoVisuals
https://youtu.be/RfwwapAGcco In answering this question, it is important to note the differences between “noncompete”, “non-solicitation”, and “company” or “trade secrets” when navigating future opportunities. “Noncompete” simply means that the employee cannot seek work in the same industry by becoming an employee or partner of a competitor. Note that the “duty of loyalty” exists without any sort of agreement— although it is always better to spell things out to all your workers via your non-disclosures. An organization’s current employees are under a “duty of loyalty” to the organization. Each state defines that duty a bit differently. In general, employees are not permitted to induce current customers, suppliers, or other employees to leave the organization, nor are they allowed to operate a competing business while still employed by the organization. When that duty is breached, the employer may be entitled to collect lost profits, punitive damages, and out-of-pocket costs incurred to train replacements. Offending employees may be forced to forfeit their salaries and to give up any profits they made as a result of the disloyal conduct. Also, courts may issue injunctions forbidding the employees to engage in similar conduct for a specified period. Under the duty of loyalty, the law generally prevents an individual from using trade secrets or proprietary information of a current or former employer to the detriment of that employer. A trade secret can be any information that derives independent economic value from not being generally known or readily ascertainable. Forty-eight states and the District of Columbia have adopted in whole or in part the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA). The UTSA codifies the basic principles of common law trade secret protection and may afford employers protection even in those states, like California, where restrictive covenants are generally not enforceable. The UTSA protects an employer from misappropriation and misuse of actual trade secrets, which are defined as information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, process, drawing, data, or customer list that: Derives independent economic value — actual or potential — from not being generally known to or readily ascertainable (by proper means) by other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use. Is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy. An employer must take reasonable measures to maintain the confidentiality of trade secrets. In determining whether reasonable steps have been taken, courts balance the costs and benefits on a case-by-case basis. Even states that have not adopted the UTSA generally accord similar protection to trade secrets under the Restatement (Second) of Torts, § 757. To determine whether a piece of information is a trade secret, states following the Restatement of Torts will generally examine the following six factors: The extent to which the information is known outside the business. The extent to which it is known by employees and others involved in the business. The extent of measures taken by the business to guard the secrecy of the information. The value of the information to the business and its competitors. The amount of effort or money expended by the business in developing the information. The ease or difficulty with which the information could be properly acquired or duplicated by others.
Before the days of online retailers, there were mattress stores. A lot of them. Right across the street from each other. Often empty. Usually owned by the same company. Why were there so many Mattress Firms? Why were they so close to one another? Could the stores be a front for an illicit money laundering scheme? Was it just a weird marketing strategy, or was there something more sinister behind it? Sources: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/7s36ub/what_conspiracy_theory_do_you_100_buy_into_and_why/dt215gv/ https://thenextweb.com/distract/2018/01/22/this-mysterious-conspiracy-theory-about-mattresses-is-everything-we-love-about-reddit/ http://www.berkshirepartners.com/mattress-firm-announces-proposed-changes-to-its-board-of-directors https://www.vault.com/company-profiles/retail/mattress-firm#:~:text=Company%20Background,11%20bankruptcy%20in%20late%202018. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mattress_Firm https://kfor.com/news/why-are-there-so-many-mattress-stores-and-how-do-they-stay-in-business/ http://www.berkshirepartners.com/steinhoff-completes-tender-offer-for-outstanding-shares-of-mattress-firm https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-chicago-mattress-stores-0717-biz-20160715-story.html https://boisedev.com/news/2016/6/21/boise-dev-mattress-firm-retail/ https://www.businessinsider.com/mattress-firm-conspiracy-grows-after-accounting-problems-2018-1 https://www.businessinsider.com/mattress-firm-closes-stores-conspiracy-theory-2018-10 https://media.thinknum.com/articles/mattress-firm-stores-proximity/ https://www.scribd.com/document/389077330/Mattress-Firm-lawsuit-against-Levy-Vinson-Deitch-et-al https://freakonomics.com/podcast/mattress-store-bubble/ https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/7s36ub/what_conspiracy_theory_do_you_100_buy_into_and_why/dt215gv/ https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/06/business/mattress-firm-bankruptcy-casper/index.html https://qz.com/1416087/mattress-firm-bankruptcy-shows-americans-hate-mattress-shopping/ https://www.texasmonthly.com/the-daily-post/why-there-are-so-many-mattress-stores-everywhere-in-texas/ https://www.chron.com/business/retail/article/Mattress-Firm-sues-bed-in-a-box-competitor-for-12285703.php https://www.steinhoffinternational.com/who-we-are-and-what-we-do.php https://www.reuters.com/article/us-steinhoff-intln-accounts/pwc-investigation-finds-7-4-billion-accounting-fraud-at-steinhoff-company-says-idUSKCN1QW2C2 https://www.cnbcafrica.com/insights/steinhoff/2018/06/28/steinhoff-rise-fall/ https://www.accountingtoday.com/articles/steinhoff-pays-for-pwc-to-help-south-african-police-graft-probe https://www.steinhoffinternational.com/downloads/2018/Restatement-of-financial-statements-of-subsidiary-companies-2Jan2018.pdf https://www.news24.com/fin24/Companies/Retail/a-steinhoff-guide-for-dummies-20171208 --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/madderthanacaterpillar/support
Greed And Lust For Power... No Laws May Be Exempted To Lawmakers... Term Limits Are Overdue... Lobbyist Reform... Voting Reform... Evil Is Sugarcoated and Chocolate Covered!
Outline -1. The Return of Abram -vv. 1-3--2. The Repentance of Abram -v. 4--3. The Rise of Strife Between Abram and Lot -vv. 5-9--4. The Required Separation of Abram and Lot -vv. 10-13--5. The Restatement of God's Promise -vv. 14-18-
Outline -1. The Return of Abram -vv. 1-3--2. The Repentance of Abram -v. 4--3. The Rise of Strife Between Abram and Lot -vv. 5-9--4. The Required Separation of Abram and Lot -vv. 10-13--5. The Restatement of God's Promise -vv. 14-18-
This episode explores one aspect of our ongoing project, Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Concluding Provisions. Specifically, we'll be discussing medical malpractice.
Web: goldcoastielts.com Instagram: goldcoast_ielts 4. Exemplification/Restatement Exemplification connectors clarify preceding information. These connectors may introduce examples or an expansion. The most common exemplification connectors are for example and for instance. Restatement connectors give deeper explanations of preceding information. Restatement connectors include that is, in other words, more precisely, which is to say, that is to say, and namely. Exemplification: There are ways in which you might build a house cheaply. For example, you could become your own project manager. Restatement: He managed to save $70,000 on the total cost of his home build. In other words, it would have cost him over $1,000,000 if he had used a well-known building company. Don’t get exemplification and restatement connectors mixed up! Your essay will sound very strange. 5. Result Result discourse connectors introduce information that is a consequence of some preceding information. Examples of result connectors include: accordingly, consequently, hence, therefore, thus, as a consequence, as a resultand so. When the result follows from an event that was described, consequentlyand as a result are usually used. When the result is inferred, thereforeor thusare used. Socan be used in both cases. Let’s look at some examples: Result of event: It was getting dark. Consequently/As a resultthey decided to call off the search. Inference: You have three and I have four. Therefore/Thuswe have seven altogether. 6. Concession The concessive discourse connectors include: nevertheless, nonetheless, in spite of that, despite that,and still. Neverthelessusually introduces content that is surprising. Example: Laura had the highest result in the whole school. Nevertheless, she still couldn’t get into the medical course. 7. Contrast Discourse connectors of contrast include: in contrast, by way of contrast, conversely, by comparison, however, instead, on the contrary, and on the other hand.There are some points to be aware of when using contrast connectors. In contrast is usually used when two subject (nouns) differ somehow. Let’s take a look. Example: American cars have traditionally had big engines. In contrast, European makers have focused on fuel economy. Howeveris a much loser contrast connecter than In contrast. We could not use In contrast in the example below. Example: He wanted to take a trip to Europe. However/In contrasthe didn’t have enough money. Finally, on the other handis used to contrast qualities of a single subject. Let’s take a look at an example. Example: Teaching is a hard job. On the one hand, you want to treat everybody individually. On the other hand, you don’t want any student to get left behind. 8. Cognitive stance Cognitive stance connectors express the writer’s attitude opinion. They should be used in IELTS task 2 responses to get high marks. They include: As it happens, indeed, in fact, actually, in actual fact,and in reality. As it happens, indeed, and in factall show the preceding information is true. They EMPHASISE what was said in the previous sentence. Example: He did not object to the idea. Indeed/In facthe actually seemed to support it. 9. Abrupt topic shift A few connectors can be used to quickly change to another topic. These include: Incidentally and apropos. Try to use a range of the discourse connectors I have shown you in today’s podcast for high marks!!
On this episode of Inter Alia, we discuss the 2011 film The Descendants and its connections to some real-life trusts in Hawaii.We are joined by Professor Randall Roth.Professor Roth is an expert in the field of trusts and estates, and was the legal consultant on the film.From 1982 to 2017, Professor Roth served on the law faculty at the University of Hawaii William S. Richardson School of Law. He has served as Associate Reporter for the Restatement of the Law (Third) Trusts. Professor Roth has also served as President of the Hawaii State Bar Association, the Hawaii Justice Foundation, Hawaii Institute for CLE, and the Hawaii Estate Planning Council. He was co-director of the Hawaii Innocence Project.Professor Roth is a 1974 graduate of the University of Denver College of Law.Special thanks to Professor Lucy Marsh for putting us in contact with Professor Roth.Links:Randall W. Roth, Deconstructing the Descendants: How George Clooney Ennobled Old Hawaiian Trusts and Made the Rule Against Perpetuities Sexy, 48 Real Prop. Tr. & Est. L.J. 291, 293 (2013). Link to Broken Trust:https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00916H2W8/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_ep_dp_7PEXzbFJS8Q7F
In this episode we jump into our first technique to help you implement Applied Critical Thinking. Problem Restatement is all about opening your perspectives to see things differently.
In this episode, Professor Amy Gajda, the Class of 1937 Professor of Law at Tulane Law School explains the four privacy torts and shares discusses the likely impact of recent cases including Bollea v. Gawker (The Hulk Hogan Case)Some key takeaways are... The Privacy Rights are(1) Misappropriation - use of another's name or identity without permission.(2) Intrusion into seclusion - peering in on someone who is in seclusion.(3) Publication of private facts (the gossip tort) publishing of private information about another person that is highly offensive and not newsworthy.(4) False Light - which is similar to the tort of defamation and not accepted in all jurisdictions.About our guest...Amy Gajda is recognized internationally for her expertise in privacy, media law, torts, and the law of higher education; her scholarship explores the tensions between social regulation and First Amendment values. Gajda’s first book, The Trials of Academe (Harvard 2009), examines public oversight of colleges and universities and its impact on academic freedom. Her later work draws on insights from her many years as an award-winning journalist and focuses on the shifting boundaries of press freedoms, particularly in light of the digital disruption of traditional media and rising public anxieties about the erosion of privacy. Her second book, The First Amendment Bubble: How Privacy and Paparazzi Threaten a Free Press (Harvard 2015), explores these boundaries in the context of judicial oversight of journalistic news judgment. Gajda is presently at work on a third book, The Secret History of the Right to Privacy, under contract with Viking and slated to be published in 2021. Her upcoming book, tentatively titled The Secret History of the Right To Privacy will be published by Viking Press. In Fall 2019, the American Law Institute appointed her to serve as an Adviser for its new Restatement on Defamation and Privacy, a multi-year project that begins in 2020. You can hear Professor Gajda's take on the Hulk Hogan case and its fallout, by visiting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnaCDyP_k7s&t=109sThis episode is sponsored by Kaplan Bar Review. Getting ready for the bar exam means you’ll need to choose the study program that’s right for you. Kaplan Bar Review will get you ready to take on test day with confidence by offering $100 off live and on-demand Bar Review with offer code Leslie100. Visit kaplanbarreview.com today to sign up.
Episode 223: Chuck talks with NAMIC's Tom Karol about the continued threat the ALI Restatement of Law on Liability Insurance poses to the industry. Plus, TRIA moves another step closer to reauthorization. And Team USA stands up for the U.S. state-based system of insurance during IAIS' Annual Conference in Abu Dhabi.
In this conversation with Gemma Kit, Restatement and New Business Manager in the Production Team in Operations shares her experience of moving to IRI from a non agency, non FMCG background. She talks about what skills she has developed to help build her knowledge and impact within IRI and also what its like to manage a team that is part based in Bracknell, and part in Netherlands
In a significant development, the Business Roundtable issued a restatement of general corporate purpose. The restatement embraces a number of important social trends and awareness of ethical culture and broader principles. While the statement is laudatory, the proof will be in tangible actions taken to implement the broad and important purposes. In this Episode, Michael Volkov examines the Business Roundtable Restatement and reflects on the important role that corporate boards should play in the oversight of a company's ethical culture.
It struck me that as we kick off our program year this fall, I want to build on sermons I preached last fall – which could be labelled “The Restatement of the Obvious.” I hope that while I will be “restating the obvious,” I will restate it in ways that remind us who we are and why we are here in this congregation of God’s people. I want to begin with “Why Worship?” Why attend church, Sunday morning, nearly every week? Why sing hymns, listen to anthems, speak to God to confess our sins, reflect on our lives, ask God’s forgiveness or help or intervention or comfort or understanding? Rev. Dr. Larry Hayward preaches on the 23rd Sunday in Ordinary Time. The Scripture lesson is 1 Thessalonians 5:12-28.
[Below is the chapter from the book, Just a Taste of Heaven, on which this podcast is based] In the last chapter, as we considered various causes of sickness, we noted that, since Christ’s death on the cross both atoned for sin and won a victory over Satan, it is possible to understand that healing from sickness is a result of his redemptive work on the cross. But that is not to say that he died for our sicknesses in the same way that he died for our sins as some teach. I have discussed this doctrine fully elsewhere[1], so in this chapter I will simply give a brief explanation of the doctrine and then summarise my findings with regard to two ‘proof-texts’ that are commonly used to support it. Explanation of the Doctrine The doctrine that Jesus died for our sicknesses as well as our sins probably originated in the Holiness Movement in America towards the end of the nineteenth century[2]. It was adopted by the early Pentecostals and forms part of the basis of faith of many major Pentecostal denominations today[3]. It also forms part of the teachings of the Faith movement[4]. In its simplest form the doctrine may be defined as follows: The view that Christians may claim healing from sickness on the grounds that Christ has already carried that sickness for them just as he has carried their sins[5]. At first sight this teaching seems very attractive. All you have to do is claim your healing by faith and you will be healed! But on closer investigation it becomes clear that there are great difficulties with it, and various modifications have been suggested[6]. We will consider this in more detail later, but in this chapter we will simply examine the two major ‘proof - texts’ that are used to support this doctrine, Matthew 8.17 and 1 Peter 2.24. The argument from Matthew 8:17 Put quite simply, the argument is as follows: Matthew 8:16 records that Jesus healed all the sick. Matthew 8:17 tells us that he did this to fulfil Isaiah 53:4. But the NT shows us elsewhere that Isaiah 53 is a prophecy of the crucifixion. Therefore Jesus carried our sicknesses on the cross as well as our sins. However, although points 1-3 of the above argument are correct, the conclusion (point 4) is not valid. The difficulty with it is that in this passage Matthew does not use the quote from Isaiah to refer to the cross. He says it was fulfilled in Jesus’ healing ministry long before he died on the cross. Matthew deals with Jesus’ death on the cross in Chapters 26-27 and nowhere in these chapters does he suggest that Jesus died for our sicknesses. Here in Chapter 8 he is describing events that took place during Jesus’ healing ministry in Galilee about three years before his death. But to explain this further we need to look at the context of Matthew 8:17 in a little more detail. Matthew 8:17 - its immediate context Matthew 8: 16-17 tells us that Jesus cast out evil spirits and healed all the sick in order to fulfil the prophecy of Isaiah 53:4, He took up our infirmities and carried our diseases. Earlier in the chapter Matthew has given us some specific examples of Jesus’ healing ministry – the leper (vv. 1-4), the centurion’s servant (vv. 5-13), Peter’s mother-in-law (vv. 14-15). Verse 16 may well be intended as a summary of these healings and others like them which he performed that evening. Then, in verse 17 he tells us that Jesus did all this to fulfil the prophecy of Isaiah 53:4, which he quotes. But why does he do this? The most natural way to interpret his use of this verse is to understand the quote to be a confirmation that Jesus was fulfilling his role of healing the sick in accordance with prophecy about the ministry of the Messiah. But this raises very important questions like why Matthew wrote his gospel, and why and how he uses Old Testament quotations[7] like the one in verse 17. Why did Matthew write his Gospel? Certain distinctive characteristics in Matthew indicate that his major purpose in writing his Gospel was connected with the needs of the Jewish people of his day[8]. This is evident from: Matthew’s portrayal of Jesusas the fulfilment of OT hopes his application of OT texts to the life and ministryof Jesus his attitude to OT lawand to the tradition of Jewish scribal teaching his accounts of Jesus’ confrontation with the official representatives of the Jewishnation and religion his understanding of the Christianchurch with respect to Judaism his use of OT quotations (of which Matthew 8:17 is one). Now the fact that Matthew is writing largely for the Jewish people of his day is highly relevant to a correct understanding of Matthew 8:17, as this is one example among many of how Matthew quotes the Old Testament to prove that Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah because he is the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy. To understand this further, we need to consider now his use of what have been called formula quotations. Matthew’s use of ‘formula’ quotations from the OT There are ten quotations[9] in which Matthew includes the ‘formula’ that what was spoken by the prophet might be fulfilled or then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet. Matthew uses these because he is seeking to present Jesus as the fulfilment of all of Israel’s hopes and ideals and in so doing to show the Jews of his day that Jesus is the Messiah. So, because the Jews expected the Messiah to be one who would heal the sick, Matthew uses Isaiah 53:4 as evidence that the healing ministry of Jesus showed that he was the one they had been waiting for. And, as we have already seen, since Matthew does not apply this scripture to Jesus’ death on the cross but to his healing the sick in Galilee, there is really no basis for saying that he is teaching us that Jesus died for our sicknesses as well as our sins, unless, of course we understand him to be pointing forward to the cross on the grounds that he is writing after the cross. However, if that were so, why doesn’t he explain this teaching more clearly and mention it while he is narrating the story of the crucifixion in Chapters 26-27? Moreover, as LFW Woodford has pointed out[10], it is noteworthy that whenever Matthew uses a ‘formula’ quotation he draws upon the scriptures quoted in order to relate their fulfilment to the actual events there and then recorded, as (e.g.) the Virgin Birth... In this passage (8:17) Matthew was not referring to our Lord’s coming passion when he drew upon this quotation, but he was referring to the actual events he was then describing. This fact strongly suggests that Matthew is not pointing us forward to the cross at all, and the obvious way to read Matthew 8:17 is to understand him as saying that Isaiah 53:4 was fulfilled in Jesus’ healing ministry, not on the cross. But that leads us to another ‘proof-text’ that is often used to support the doctrine that Jesus carried our sicknesses on the cross – 1 Peter 2:24. The argument from 1 Peter 2:24 The last part of 1 Peter 2:24 states, By his wounds you were healed. In this section we will consider why it’s important to understand this correctly. I am going to argue, as I mentioned in Chapter 2, that the word healed in this verse is used metaphorically and should not be taken literally to apply to the healing of disease. A simple look at the context will show this very clearly. Peter’s first letter was written at a time when the church was undergoing persecution and its main theme could be summarised as suffering now, future glory. This is seen in several passages such as 1:6-7, 11; 4:12-13, 19; 5:10. At no point in the letter does Peter discuss sickness or divine healing. 1 Peter 2:24 is part of a passage which encourages Christians to be submissive to those who are in authority (2:13 – 3:6). This passage falls naturally into three sections which deal in turn with: submission to rulers(2:13-17) submission to masters(2:18-25) submission to husbands(3:1-6). We will deal with (1) briefly as it serves as an introduction to (2) which we will deal with in detail. We will not need to consider (3). Submission to rulers (2:13-17) Peter says that as Christians we are to submit ourselves to those in authority so that by our good behaviour we may put to silence those who accuse us (vv. 13-17). We are free, but we must not use our freedom as an excuse for doing wrong, for despite our freedom we are God’s slaves (v.16). So we submit to those in authority because we are submitted to God. It is for the Lord’s sake that we submit to authority, no matter what form that authority may take (v.13). Submission to masters (2:18-25) From the previous section we see that submission to human authority is an expression of our submission to divine authority. This should enable us meekly to accept the decisions of those who have authority over us. At the time that Peter was writing, this was of special relevance to slaves[11] and Peter speaks to them specifically in verses 18-25 telling them to submit to their masters even if they are harsh. It’s quite likely that they will have to put up with unfair treatment and will suffer unjustly (vv. 19-20). If this occurs they are to remember that they are called by Christ’s own example to endure it (vv.20 - 21)[12]. Jesus is the supreme example of an innocent person who suffered unjustly! There is no suggestion in these verses that Christians do not need to suffer because Christ has already suffered for them. Quite the opposite is indicated. The Christian who suffers for doing good must endure it patiently knowing that this is God’s will for him, for Christ himself has set an example for him to follow (vv.20 - 21)[13]. Verses 22-25 (cf. Isaiah 53) set forth the sufferings of Christ as the supreme example of the innocent suffering unjustly. They demonstrate the principle, already stated in v.21, that Christ’s sufferings are an example for the Christian to follow. The statements that: Christwas innocent (v. 22), he refused to retaliate or complain (v.23), he committed of himself to God(v.23) are all clearly intended as an example and an encouragement to the Christian slave who is suffering unjust punishment. Furthermore, such an interpretation of these verses is completely in harmony with the teaching concerning suffering elsewhere in the letter[14]. But Christ’s innocence, his non-retaliation, and his committing himself to God are not the only encouragement to the Christian who is suffering unjust punishment. He is encouraged even more by the results of Christ’s suffering. Jesus’ death was not in vain! It purchased our salvation! The sense of purposelessness felt by those enduring unjustly inflicted suffering is softened for the Christian by the realisation that Christ’s sufferings were by no means without purpose. Verses 24-25 remind us of this. Christ’s sufferings were redemptive. The innocent slave who is unjustly beaten by his master is reminded that Christ too was unjustly punished, but not without purpose for Christ bore our sins that we might die to sin and live to righteousness (v.24) and as a result the wandering sheep has returned to the shepherd (v.25). Perhaps the slave might understand that his suffering too is not without a purpose, even though he might not understand what that purpose might be. Nevertheless, although there is no suggestion here that the slaves’ suffering might be redemptive in the sense that Christ’s suffering is redemptive, the suggestion might well be that by following Christ’s example in enduring unjust suffering meekly the slaves might, by their Christ-like attitude, win others to Christ (Cf. the instruction to wives in 3:1). But that brings us now to by whose wounds you were healed which we are seeking to understand. To do so correctly we must bear in mind the context. Peter is presenting to slaves, who were sometimes unjustly treated, the example of Christ whose suffering provides the pattern for all who suffer unjustly. And the relevance of the phrase by whose wounds you were healed in a passage addressed to slaves who were sometimes unjustly flogged is obvious. The word translated as wounds is mōlōps which means a bruise, scar, or weal left by a lash and describes a physical condition with which the slaves were very familiar. To slaves who were unjustly beaten Peter points out that Christ too was beaten, and because of the wounds inflicted upon him they have been ‘healed’. The fact that Peter says you were healed rather than we are healed (Isaiah 53:5) highlights the fact that it is particularly the slaves who are addressed here for it is for them that the use of the word mōlōps (wounds) is especially significant. But in what sense had the slaves been ‘healed’? Peter obviously intends them to understand here the forgiveness of their sins. He is talking about ‘healing’ from the wounds of sin. This is clear from the following facts: Immediately before this Peterhas said that Christ bore our sins that we might die to sin and live to righteousness He uses the conjunction for in verse 25 thus identifying their ‘healing’ in verse 24 as what took place when as sheep going astray they returned to the shepherd (v.25). The fact that no such conjunction is found in Isaiah53:6 may indicate that Peter is especially stressing this connection and certainly suggests that the ‘healing’ referred to is spiritual[15]. You were healed is undoubtedly a reference to the slaves’ conversion. Furthermore, to seek to understand the ‘healing’ as physical seems to be totally inappropriate. There is no reference to the healing of disease anywhere in the epistle, let alone in the immediate context. The ‘healing’ referred to clearly means a spiritual wholeness which results from Christ’s bearing our sins on the cross and our return, as sheep who had gone astray, to the shepherd and guardian of our souls. The passage is, in fact, an encouragement to Christians to endure suffering, not a means of escape from it. Conclusion In this chapter we have shown that Matthew takes Isaiah 53:4 and applies it to healing, but NOT the cross. Peter takes Isaiah 53:5 and applies it to the cross, but NOT to physical healing. This means that neither verse supports the teaching that Jesus died for sickness as well as sin. However, as I have already suggested, there is a sense in which healing may be understood to be in the atonement[16], but that does not mean that Jesus died for our sicknesses just as he died for our sins. In fact, when taken to an extreme, this doctrine can be very dangerous. For example, if we understand, as some do, that By his wounds you were healed (1 Peter 2:24) means that Jesus’ death was our healing and that, therefore, we cannot really be sick because Jesus has already healed us by his death, we are led into denying that we are sick and claiming that we are already ‘healed’, when in fact we may be seriously ill and in need of medical treatment. There are even cases of people who have died prematurely because of this very thing[17]. That is why it is extremely important that we understand that By his wounds you were healed is, as I have already demonstrated, a reference to the slaves’ conversion when, because Jesus had died for their sins, they were healed from the spiritual wounds that sin inflicts and returned to the Shepherd of their souls. [1] Petts, David, Healing and the Atonement, PhD Thesis, Nottingham University, 1993 [2]See Dayton, D.W.., Theological Roots of Pentecostalism, Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1987, pp.115-141. [3]These include Assemblies of God (Britain, France, USA) and Church of God (Cleveland USA). [4]See, for example, Copeland, G., God’s Will For You, Fort Worth, KCP, 1972, pp 126ff. For a critique of the Faith Movement, see McConnell, D.R., The Promise of Health and Wealth, London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1990. [5]This is the definition I have adopted in my Thesis. [6]See Thesis pp.44-54 for some examples of modifications offered by others and pp. 327-370 for my own modification. [7]For detailed discussion of this see Thesis pp. 102-140. [8]France, R. T., Matthew, Tyndale NT Commentary, Leicester, IVP, 1985, p.17. See also France’s article in Themelios, Vol. 14, No.2, 1989, p.42. [9]1:22-23, 2:15, 2:17-18, 2:23, 4:14-16, 8:17, 12:17-21, 21: 4-5, 27:9-10. (Cf. also 2:5-6). [10]Woodford, L.F.W. Divine Healing and the Atonement - a Restatement, London, Victoria Institute, 1956, p. 58. [11]Those addressed are oiketai (household-slaves), many of whom might be well educated and hold responsible positions in the household. They were, however, owned by their despotes (master) and did not work for a wage. Although most masters were relatively humane, beatings were common and were the normal punishment for the ordinary faults of the slave. [12]hupogrammon - ‘example’ - literally refers to the model of handwriting to be copied by a schoolboy and then figuratively to a model of conduct for imitation. Slaves who suffer unjustly are thus encouraged to follow step by step the example of Christ outlined in the verses which follow. [13]Cf. 1 Peter 4:12-19 where the same teaching is repeated with reference to Christians in general, not only to slaves. The Christian who suffers is seen as participating in the sufferings of Christ (4:13) and is suffering according to God’s will (4:19). [14] Cf. 3:8-18, 4:12-19. [15] Forgiveness of sins also seems to be the clear sense of the 'healing' referred to in Isaiah 53:5 where the Servant is pierced for transgressions and crushed for iniquities. [16] See pp. 115-120. See also Chapter 18 where I develop this further. [17] See pp. 188-191.
In this podcast, Alan Kaplinsky, who leads our Consumer Financial Services Group, interviews Steven Weise, a member of ALI’s Council, about the criticism of the Restatement from businesses and consumer advocates. In addition to explaining the Restatement’s background and rationale, Steven responds to criticism of the research methodology and specific substantive provisions.
In this podcast, Alan Kaplinsky, who leads our Consumer Financial Services Group, interviews Professor Adam Levitin of Georgetown University Law School about why businesses and consumer advocates are both opposed to the proposed Restatement, which would change the law in ways that will harm businesses and consumers.
The American Law Institute (ALI) is a familiar and trusted institution for jurists across the country who rely on its “restatements” of disperse common law jurisprudence. More recently, the ALI embarked on a different type of project; to “restate” not common law, but the federal statutory law of the U.S. Copyright Act. The origins of the project do not attempt to conceal its intent to be normative and to take the place of unsuccessful statutory reform efforts. As a result, the project has raised objections, including from the head of the U.S. Copyright Office, that it is inappropriate to “restate” a field undergirded by statutory law and that it is an invitation to activist judicial decisions to depart from the statute in favor of whatever policies the ALI adopts. Predictably for a norm-setting process, it has been further complicated by concerns about bias and lack of transparency. This panel discussion will consider whether the ALI project is appropriate and fair. Featuring:Prof. June Besek, Lecturer in Law; Executive Directo, Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the ArtsMr. Sy Damle, Partner, Latham & Watkins, LLPModerator: Mr. Steven Tepp, President & CEO, Sentinel WorldwideTeleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up on our website. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.
The American Law Institute (ALI) is a familiar and trusted institution for jurists across the country who rely on its “restatements” of disperse common law jurisprudence. More recently, the ALI embarked on a different type of project; to “restate” not common law, but the federal statutory law of the U.S. Copyright Act. The origins of the project do not attempt to conceal its intent to be normative and to take the place of unsuccessful statutory reform efforts. As a result, the project has raised objections, including from the head of the U.S. Copyright Office, that it is inappropriate to “restate” a field undergirded by statutory law and that it is an invitation to activist judicial decisions to depart from the statute in favor of whatever policies the ALI adopts. Predictably for a norm-setting process, it has been further complicated by concerns about bias and lack of transparency. This panel discussion will consider whether the ALI project is appropriate and fair. Featuring:Prof. June Besek, Lecturer in Law; Executive Directo, Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the ArtsMr. Sy Damle, Partner, Latham & Watkins, LLPModerator: Mr. Steven Tepp, President & CEO, Sentinel WorldwideTeleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up on our website. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.
Jeffrey Van Volkenburg, a leading insurance practitioner in West Virginia, discusses his experience litigating in a jurisdiction where many coverage questions remain unresolved. Jeff describes the importance of crafting nuanced and creative arguments, as well as strategic considerations in initiating coverage litigation in a jurisdiction with underdeveloped insurance law. Jeff then opines as to how West Virginia’s coverage law will advance in the coming years, especially in light of the ALI’s Restatement of the Law, Liability Insurance. Notably, Jeff recorded his episode while at the McNeer Highland firm, although he has since started his own firm with another podcast guest, Debra Varner. The firm’s name is Varner & Van Volkenburg PLLC.
At UVA Law’s 31st Sokol Colloquium, University of Pennsylvania law professor Jean Galbraith, Northwestern law professor Jide Nzelibe and UVA Law professor George Rutherglen discussed the ambitions of the fourth restatement with moderator and UVA law professor Mila Versteeg. During the colloquium, scholars, jurists and practitioners discussed the American Law Institute’s “The Restatement (Fourth) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States.” (University of Virginia School of Law, Jan. 11, 2019)
At UVA Law’s 31st Sokol Colloquium, George Washington law professor Ed Swaine, UC Davis law professor Bill Dodge and Russian Association of International Law professor Bakhtiyar Tuzmukhamedov discussed international law with moderator and UVA Law professor Pierre-Hugues Verdier. During the colloquium, scholars, jurists and practitioners discussed the American Law Institute’s “The Restatement (Fourth) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States.” (University of Virginia School of Law, Jan. 11, 2019)
Tom Werlein, associate counsel for Sentry Insurance, joins Timely Notice for a discussion of Sections 3, 4, and 21 of the ALI Restatement of the Laws of Liability Insurance. Tom explains the implications of a modified plain-meaning rule, the newfound importance of custom practice and usage, and whether a subjective belief by an insured is appropriate for policy interpretation. Tom also shares his insights on whether an insurer should be able to recover defense costs and settlement payments attributable to uncovered claims.
Episode #112: Chuck talks with Tim Koppenhaver, Executive Vice President at Loudoun Mutual, about the benefits that resulted from his three-week sabbatical. Plus, new research shows the importance of tracking state disaster spending. And an ALI Restatement is rejected in Ohio. Why that's a big win for the insurance industry.
8 WAYS TO PERSIST TOWARD YOUR GOALS Joe likes spreadsheets. Kori likes bullet-points. They both like taking action! In this episode Kori & Joe outline 8 ways to enhance the tenacity and persistence that you approach your goals with so that action, momentum, and a growth mindset reign! 00:15 Review of Podcast 48; PERMA model of happiness 01:40 Message from a Client 03:50 Goals must be attached to values. The value of having a life-unifying project. 05:55 1. Become aware of the Character Strengths (esp. Top 5) 06:20 2. Use them in the context of your life 07:00 3. Notice the good. Extend gratitude. Acknowledge your efforts. 08:10 4. Use what's not ideal to notice all that IS ideal. 09:10 5. Make the tasks too easy NOT to do. 11:25 6. Have a challenge network AND a support network. 13:15 7. Learn to toggle between the outcome & the process 14:30 8. Understand the difference between pleasure & enjoyment 18:20 Joe's summary & reflections 21:15 Restatement of the 8 WAYS Thanks for visiting! Kori Propst, PhD, and Joe Klemczewski, PhD, merge their voices to create life-enhancing conversations and content you can use every day. Kori is the Vice President and Wellness Director of The Diet Doc, LLC—a health and weight-loss licensing company founded by Joe more than 20 years ago. Together, Joe and Kori help hundreds of Diet Doc Program Owners build industry-leading nutrition coaching platforms around the world. Now they're bringing their talent to a daily podcast where nothing is off limits. Motivation, nutrition, weight loss, career, relationships, fitness entrepreneurship, and even guest interviews and features will be dissected and categorized for convenient listening or viewing. What happens when you mix 30 years of psychology, nutrition, physiology, social anthropology, and even literary journalism education with 40 years of business-building experience and almost 90 years (should I say that?) of combined real life? Let's find out! SUBSCRIBE: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-diet-doc-life-mastery-podcast/id1385194556?mt=2&i=1000412057177 http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=thedietdocweightloss FITNESS ENTREPRENEUR? Find out how to become The Diet Doc expert in your community! https://www.dropbox.com/s/mv4mwtiignpxkn2/The%20Diet%20Doc%20MEDIA%20KIT%202018.pdf?dl=0 FREE QUIZ: DO YOU HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO MEET YOUR GOALS? https://www.dropbox.com/s/thmmokbc3kd8uw3/Principles%20of%20Persistent%20Pursuit%20-%20Free%20Assessment.pdf?dl=0 LET'S CONNECT! Website: https://www.thedietdoc.com Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/TheDietDoc Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/dietdocglobal Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/thedietdocweightloss Podcast: https://soundcloud.com/thedietdoc
Professor Litman, John F. Nickoll Professor of Law at the University of Michigan, delivered the thirteenth Annual International Intellectual Property Lecture (funded from the Herchel Smith Bequest) at Emmanuel College entitled 'Copyright and Property-Think' on 13 March 2018 as a guest of CIPIL (the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law). Professor Jessica Litman is the John F. Nickoll Professor of Law at the University of Michigan, where she teaches copyright law, trademark law, and advanced IP courses. Litman is the author of Digital Copyright and the co-author, with Jane Ginsburg and Mary Lou Kevlin, of the casebook Trademarks and Unfair Competition Law: Cases and Materials. She is an adviser for the American Law Institute's Restatement of Copyright, and has served as a trustee of the Copyright Society of the USA, and chair of the Association of American Law Schools Section on Intellectual Property. In this year’s lecture, she will argue that when we think about the copyright system, our assumptions about legal property rights shape what we see and what we don’t. We assume that broadening or narrowing the scope of copyright will redound to the benefit or detriment of creators. Three hundred years of evidence, though, belie that supposition. We need to think more concretely about copyright law's actual effect on creators, and their ability to communicate and profit from their works. For more information see the CIPIL website at http://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk
Professor Litman, John F. Nickoll Professor of Law at the University of Michigan, delivered the thirteenth Annual International Intellectual Property Lecture (funded from the Herchel Smith Bequest) at Emmanuel College entitled 'Copyright and Property-Think' on 13 March 2018 as a guest of CIPIL (the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law). Professor Jessica Litman is the John F. Nickoll Professor of Law at the University of Michigan, where she teaches copyright law, trademark law, and advanced IP courses. Litman is the author of Digital Copyright and the co-author, with Jane Ginsburg and Mary Lou Kevlin, of the casebook Trademarks and Unfair Competition Law: Cases and Materials. She is an adviser for the American Law Institute's Restatement of Copyright, and has served as a trustee of the Copyright Society of the USA, and chair of the Association of American Law Schools Section on Intellectual Property. In this year’s lecture, she will argue that when we think about the copyright system, our assumptions about legal property rights shape what we see and what we don’t. We assume that broadening or narrowing the scope of copyright will redound to the benefit or detriment of creators. Three hundred years of evidence, though, belie that supposition. We need to think more concretely about copyright law's actual effect on creators, and their ability to communicate and profit from their works. For more information see the CIPIL website at http://www.cipil.law.cam.ac.uk
Ginger Bentham, Cooper S. Beckett, and Dylan Thomas return to Desire Resort & Spa for Swingset’s second full resort takeover and for their sixth annual pilgrimage to the sexiest place on earth. While the tequila flows, they take time to examine why pleasure, gratitude, compassion, and love are supremely important, and they take time to defiantly and emphatically restate the values of the Swingset. Join us at the sexiest place on earth at Desire Resorts in the Riviera Maya, Cancun, Mexico, from November 3rd through November 10th, 2018! Head to ssdesire.com for more information! You can support us while you buy great sex toys and products from our favorite online retailer SheVibe at lifeontheswingset.com/shevibe. Help support Life on the Swingset continue to make podcasts, and put on live panels and shows into the future! Throw us a dollar (or a few) each time we release an episode on Patreon! Your support will also get you invited to a private chat system with other Swingsetters, and give you the opportunity to join live podcast recordings. The best FREE thing you can do to support us is leave us a five-star review. Come to our review gateway, then copy and paste your review into iTunes or Stitcher! Android Users: Download and review our Android App! Leave us a comment on this post or at contact@lifeontheswingset.com or leave us a voicemail at 573-55-SWING (573-557-9464). You can now pre-order Cooper’s novel Approaching The Swingularity, his previous novel A Life Less Monogamous, or his memoir My Life on the Swingset: Adventures in Swinging & Polyamory as an ebook, paperback, or audiobook. Use promo code SWINGSET at coopersbeckett.com to save 10%. Help Dylan edit by buying him something from his Amazon Wishlist! Intro and Outro Music: Puppet – Dynamo Our 2017 THEME comes courtesy of Vlad Lucan and his track: Reverse! Cooper S Beckett Dylan Thomas Ginger Bentham
We talk with Greg Klass about the use of recent empirical studies to aid in the restatement of the law of consumer contracts - the one-sided, unread "agreements" that are ubiquitous in modern life. The conversation covers the purpose of restatements, the methodology of empirical legal scholarship, and more. This show’s links: Greg Klass's faculty profile (https://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/klass-gregory.cfm) and writing (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=363445) Greg Klass, A Critical Assessment of the Empiricism in the Restatement of Consumer Contract Law (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3001212) Oral Argument 133: Too Many Darn Radio Buttons (http://oralargument.org/133) (guest Jim Gibson) John Gruber, Apple to Release Software Update to Solve iOS 11 Issue When Typing the Letter "I" (https://daringfireball.net/linked/2017/11/07/ios-11-i) About the ALI's draft Restatement of Consumer Contracts (http://www.thealiadviser.org/consumer-contracts/) Oren Bar-Gill, Omri Ben-Shahar, and Florencia Marotta-Wurgler, Searching for the Common Law: The Quantitative Approach of the Restatement of Consumer Contracts (http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclrev/vol84/iss1/2/) Florencia Marotta-Wurgler, Does Contract Disclosure Matter? (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2736521); Yannis Bakos, Florencia Marotta-Wurgler, David Trossen, Does Anyone Read the Fine Print? Consumer Attention to Standard Form Contracts (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1443256) Arthur Leff, Contract as Thing (http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/2827/) William Baude, Adam Chilton, and Anup Malani, Making Doctrinal Work More Rigorous: Lessons from Systematic Reviews (http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/public_law_and_legal_theory/622/) Gregory Klass and Kathryn Zeiler, Against Endowment Theory: Experimental Economics and Legal Scholarship (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2224105) Special Guest: Greg Klass.
Attorney Robert Tomilson is a partner at Clark Hill, an insurance law practice based in Philadelphia, PA. He serves as an insurance subject matter expert in the areas of insurers, reinsurers, and intermediaries in litigation and regulatory investigations. He also serves as an advisor to the American Law Institute’s Restatement of the Law of Liability Insurance as well as an adjunct professor of insurance at Drexel University School of Law. Robert joins me today to discuss the differences between MGAs and MGUs, the various challenges associated with each, and the risk factors to consider when starting a new innovative insurance agency. He also shares tips on how new insurance agencies can leverage regulations to speed the process of starting their organization. “The regulations are not always transparent for how to comply.” - Robert Tomilson Today on Spot On Insurance: What are MGUs and MGAs How MGUs differ from MGAs Challenges of getting set up as an insurance provider in multiple states The risks of innovation in the insurance industry The importance of understanding what the laws and regulations require Why it may be better to get licensed in a different jurisdiction Ways to use the regulations in your favor as a startup insurance agency Key Takeaways: Be aware that the insurance industry tends to operate slowly and cautiously. Hire knowledgeable staff. Have the judgement and experience to make good use of the regulations. Connect with Robert Tomilson: www.clarkhill.com This episode was brought to you by… Spot On Insurance is brought to you by Insurance Licensing Services of America (ILSA), America’s Premier Insurance Licensing experts. To learn more about ILSA and their services, visit ILSAinc.com. Connect, Learn, Share Thank you for joining us on this week’s episode of Spot On Insurance. For more resources and episodes, visit SpotOnInsurance.com. Subscribe so you never miss an episode. Love what you’re learning, Spot Light your review on iTunes and share your favorite episodes with friends and colleagues!
Since 1923, the American Law Institute has exercised more influence on judge-made common law than any other private institution. The ALI’s most influential work has come in the form of periodic publications known as Restatements of the Law. These descriptions of existing law are relied on and trusted by judges, lawyers, legal scholars, and law students for thoughtfully objective analysis. In 2009, ALI published the first volume of “Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Liability for Physical and Emotional Harm.” For the first time in the institute’s history, its restatement went beyond reviewing existing law and recommended fundamental change: an unprecedented expansion of landowners’ duty of care to all visitors, including unwanted trespassers. This restatement was lauded by the trial bar and sent shockwaves through corporate legal circles. Although ALI has as much right as other interest groups to advocate for changes in the law, is it still entitled to special deference from judges? Justice Antonin Scalia raised concerns in a 2015 opinion. The authors of ALI restatements, he observed, have “over time . . . abandoned the mission of describing the law, and have chosen instead to set forth their aspirations for what the law ought to be.” Victor Schwartz, Partner at Shook Hardy & Bacon, joined us for a discussion on the American Law Institute's evolving position on civil liability reform. -- Featuring: Victor E. Schwartz, Partner, Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP.
Form 990 is one of the most public and transparent of all returns. Unless allowed to file a simpler 990-EZ or 990-N, Form 990 must be filed completely and accurately each year by every exempt organizations or they can lose tax their exemption. This workshop will cover some of the more complex areas of the form and provide tips to avoid misreporting or being audited by the IRS. It also cover how to get your tax exemption restated after revocation.
Form 990 is one of the most public and transparent of all returns. Unless allowed to file a simpler 990-EZ or 990-N, Form 990 must be filed completely and accurately each year by every exempt organizations or they can lose tax their exemption. This workshop will cover some of the more complex areas of the form and provide tips to avoid misreporting or being audited by the IRS. It also cover how to get your tax exemption restated after revocation.
In a world where a single power controlled the language of justice itself, one man (well, several people and a bunch of students, but anyway) rose up to … produce a free guide to the standardized practices of legal citation. Copyright scholar Chris Sprigman joins us to talk about two of his projects: Baby Blue, the open guide to legal citation, and the Restatement of Copyright. Our conversation: about Baby Blue (0:01:33), what in the Bluebook might be copyrightable (0:10:07), trademark and the two manuals’ names and colors (0:23:44), simplification of citation (0:39:43), and the Restatement of Copyright (0:56:52). This show’s links: Chris Sprigman’s faculty profile, twitter, and writing Baby Blue: web page and PDF Oral Argument 88: The Blue Line The Bluebook Links to correspondence between lawyers for The Bluebook and others and the Baby Blue team Zotero and Papers The University of Chicago’s Citation Management for Law Students; Georgetown’s Bluebook Citation Resources and Detailed Feature Comparison Cory Doctorow, Five Years of Being Intimidated by the Harvard Bluebook’s Copyright Policies; FGBR, The Bluebook: A Plot Summary The Baby Blue public request for comments Subject matter of copyright: In general (s.102(b)) Lotus v. Borland The University of Chicago Law Review, The Maroonbook McNeil Nutritionals v. Heartland Sweeteners (3d Cir. 2007) and later proceedings American Law Institute, Restatement of Copyright About secondary liability for copyright infringement Cartoon Network v. CSC Holdings and Cablevision Systems (whether 1.2 seconds of buffering on a hard drive is a “fixation”) Special Guest: Christopher Sprigman.
Ever ones to speak, the team takes on the topic of active listening this week. Jeff, Mona and Allen discuss the elements of good listening, the habitual quirks of bad listening, and offer ideas concerning the cultivation of listening as both art and skill. The latest installment of Knowin’ Jemonen follows the discussion and reveals the co-hosts’ favorite works of fiction. Host Check In (00:25) Active Listening Conversation (08:25) Knowin’ Jemonen Segment (54:14) This week Allen presented us with some helpful tips on how to create a space where we can make people feel heard. Pay Attention (stay with the person on the edge of their experience) Nonjudgement Generally embrace the speaker’s perspective Concreteness (focus on specifics instead of vague generalities) Restatement (repeat what the person said) Rephrasing (slightly reword and summarize) Reflection (“it sounds like you feel”) The Three R’s Be comfortable with silence Why questions (can be taken as accusatory) Quick reassurance (“oh, it’s ok…”) Advising Interrupting Avoid Roadblocks to Listening RELEVANT LINKS From Host Check In Miss USA Math Question (YouTube Video) From Conversation My Little Pony Cake Story (article) Cake Fails (buzzfeed article) People receive less than 5-10 min of high quality listening a week (Practical Psychology book) Practical Psychology for Pastors by William R. Miller and Kathleen A. Jackson (book - Amazon Affiliate Link) Carl Rogers, American Psychologist (wikipedia page) How to Truly Listen by Evelyn Glennie (TED Talk) Known’ Jemonen Segment Charles Bukowski (author) The Swiss Family Robinson by Johann D. Wyss (book - Amazon Affiliate Link) Breakfast of Champions (book - Amazon Affiliate Link) East of Eden (book - Amazon Affiliate Link) Watchman by Alan Moore (graphic novel - Amazon Affiliate Link) The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller (graphic novel - Amazon Affiliate Link) Andre the Giant by Box Brown (graphic novel - Amazon Affiliate Link) THANK YOU A big thank you to Mike Golin for our intro and outro music. Check out his band Soulwise. WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU Thank you for supporting the podcast! Your ratings, reviews and feedback are not only encouraging to us personally, but they help others find the show. If you appreciate the content we provide please rate, review and subscribe to the podcast on iTunes and Stitcher. Join our conversations on faith and culture by interacting with us through the following links: Read Us on our blog An Irenicon Email Us at podcast@irenicast.com Follow Us on Twitter and Google+ Like Us on Facebook Listen to Us on iTunes, Stitcher, SoundCloud and TuneIn Speak to Us on our Feedback Page Love Us
Don Boudreaux of George Mason University talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the nature of public debt. One view is that there is no burden of the public debt as long as the purchasers of U.S. debt are fellow Americans. In that case, the argument goes, we owe it to ourselves. Drawing on the work of James Buchanan, particularly his book Public Principles of Public Debt: A Defense and Restatement, Boudreaux argues that there is a burden of the debt and it is borne by future taxpayers. Boudreaux argues that all public expenditures have a cost--the different financing mechanisms simply determine who bears the burden of that cost. Boudreaux discusses the political attractiveness of debt finance because the taxes lie in the future and those who will pay for them may not be clearly identified. The conversation closes with a discussion of the role of expectations in both politics and economics of debt finance.
Don Boudreaux of George Mason University talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the nature of public debt. One view is that there is no burden of the public debt as long as the purchasers of U.S. debt are fellow Americans. In that case, the argument goes, we owe it to ourselves. Drawing on the work of James Buchanan, particularly his book Public Principles of Public Debt: A Defense and Restatement, Boudreaux argues that there is a burden of the debt and it is borne by future taxpayers. Boudreaux argues that all public expenditures have a cost--the different financing mechanisms simply determine who bears the burden of that cost. Boudreaux discusses the political attractiveness of debt finance because the taxes lie in the future and those who will pay for them may not be clearly identified. The conversation closes with a discussion of the role of expectations in both politics and economics of debt finance.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
