Post any questions about legal terminology here.

Views: 208

Replies to This Discussion

Comment by Carmen Hunter on February 4, 2009 at 9:42pm Delete Comment
It's Rifkind! Thanks!


Comment by Marla Williams on February 4, 2009 at 8:49pm Delete Comment
Carmen, I think it's Rifkind, with a "d." FindLaw.com has these cases listed http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/callawps.pl?pname=Rifkind:
22 Cal.App.4th 1255
Rifkind v. Superior Court
Feb 23, 1994. No. B075946.

28 Cal.App.4th 1282
Rifkind & Sterling, Inc. v. Rifkind
Sep 28, 1994. No. B074042.

28 Cal.App.3d 1070
Newberger v. Rifkind
November 28, 1972. Civ. No. 39218.

123 Cal.App.3d 1045
RIFKIND v. SUPERIOR COURT
September 30, 1981. Civ. No. 62273.

227 Cal.App.3d 1380
Bergman v. Rifkind & Sterling, Inc.
Feb. 28, 1991. No. B050024.


But cf. State v. Rifkin, 438 A.2d 1122 (Vt. 198 1)(an arresting officer or other witness may render an opinion as to whether a defendant was under the influence of drugs only when qualified as an expert).

Hope it helps. Comment by Carmen Hunter on February 4, 2009 at 5:06pm Delete Comment
I guess I want to confirm it somewhere. I'm sure the spelling is right, but I don't want to assume. Any help appreciated.Thanks.


Comment by Carmen Hunter on February 4, 2009 at 5:05pm Delete Comment
Still looking for help re Rifkin. Maybe someone here can lend a hand

Does anyone know the spelling for "Rifkin"? It was used in a legal contention objection and they cited Rifkin, but I can't find it. It has something to do with lay witnesses giving expert testimony. Help?!
I have listened to my audio a thousand times, and all I hear is "inquisite" That word is only a word in italian meaning to investigate to inquire. What can he be saying?

THE COURT: So on its face, your position
is the first refusal was an unreasonable refusal
to appear. And that the rescheduled one -- now
what happened -- in that rescheduled one if you
do it gratuitously, that should not be
considered an inquisite admission, because there
was nothing to admit to; it was done properly.
I forgot about this post. It was implicit. <3
LiveScan, Live-Scan, live scan, livescan? I don't know if it's a generic term of art or if it's a brand name. I haven't found anything online indicating it's a brand name. Does anyone know for sure? It's driving me crazy!!
Live Scan is a company that does fingerprinting for businesses and government, atleast in California where I live. They have a bit of a racket. Even if you get fingerprinted with them on Tuesday for one background check paying the full fee, you still have to pay the full price for an additional fingerprinting on Wednesday for another company.

On google and then the company website it came up as Live Scan.
Derek, I've never found any reference on the Internet to the company, have you? Where are they located?
http://www.livescanca.net/

It's odd because I see it spelled Livescan on some sites, and Live Scan on others. It is essentially a database with fixed and mobile centers to take fingerprinting.
That site you gave, Derek, isn't THE LiveScan company; it's just a company that provides the LiveScan service in California. I've been hoping to actually see the machine and see if the manufacturer is named LiveScan or if it's just the generic term that's been coined. It's driving me crazy!! :O

Keep hunting, people! One of us has GOT to be able to find out how it's spelled.
Wow, that's a real toughie. I consider myself a professional Googler -- LOL -- and I came up with the same variations that you have: LiveScan, Live-Scan, Live Scan, and Livescan.

Based on this site, I'm inclined to think that it is "LiveScan": Printrak LiveScan Technology

Upon further review, however, Sagem Morpho merged with a company called Printrak sometime ago and thereafter became MorphoTrak, a SAFRAN Group.

According to the FBI's certified product list, it is spelled all ways: FBI Certified Products List

After a thorough search, which I know all of you have already done, I am getting the feeling that it can be spelled any way, as long as one is consistent with the same spelling of it within the transcript. Kind of like decision-maker/decisionmaker, health care/healthcare, Wal-Mart/Walmart.
Thank you for coming up with this aspect of the forum! I'm relatively new to legal transcribing, and so I'm still learning so much when it comes to legal terminology.

I'm transcribing a bench trial right now, and it sounds as if the Court says: Both parties have announced ready and have reported for hours.

The part I'm having trouble making sense of is "have reported for hours." Is this a common legal expression?
If not, any ideas out there about what this might actually be?

Thank you so much!
Seah
I'm probably way too late in answering your question, but I believe it should be four hours. Having worked in court for many years, the judge always asks for a time estimate of any hearing, motion or trial before starting it. So the judge is saying the attorneys have reported a four-hour time estimate.
Thank you so much, Caryn! No, you're not too late in answering that question at all! I'm still working on the transcript.

Also, as a relatively new transcriptionist, I appreciate your in-depth explanation! This is going to help me in many future transcripts, as well as the one I'm currently working on. Thank you again for taking the time to answer this!

Sharon

RSS

© 2019   Created by Kelli Combs (admin).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service