Cass Gilbert’s Washington Supreme Court Building, Completed In 1935

The history of Roman architecture has its roots in Grecian and Etruscan architecture. While influenced to some extent by the Etruscan civilization that preceded theirs on the Italian mainland, the Romans considered Grecian culture as the acme of perfection and borrowed liberally from it. In the early days of the Roman Republic, Grecian artisans were engaged to construct Roman buildings in the Greek manner. Distinctly Roman elements meant for distinctly Roman purposes began to appear in the later days of the Republic, around the 1st century B.C., but Roman architecture really came into its own in the Augustan Age and onwards. Emperor Augustus famously claimed to have turned Rome from a city of bricks into a city of marble. The Italian mainland was rich in resources that could be used as building materials. The travertine hard stone and the Carrara white marble were readily available, as was clay for bricks and pozzolana sand and lava for concrete. Roman colonies in Greece, Spain, Gaul, Asia and North Africa supplied marbles, alabaster and other materials.

Unlike the Greeks, who seemed mainly interested in temple, theater and stadium architecture of comparatively small scale, the Romans had a penchant for imposing buildings and structures that would reflect the prestige, might and wealth of the Roman Empire. Such buildings and structures, erected in every corner of the Empire, were also meant to serve as unifying symbols for Roman citizens. Roman roads and bridges were needed to connect different parts of the the Empire. This facilitated governance of Roman territory as well as the expansion of the Empire. Roman aqueducts were needed to supply water to the cities. Roman cities served as administrative hubs throughout the Empire. The cities usually had a forum and a basilica at the center and a protective city wall. Roman cities were crowded and it was necessary to address the issue of housing the urban population and maintaining order. The Romans built multi-storied tenement buildings known as insulae to house the middle and lower classes; the upper classes lived in city palaces and country villas. To decorate public places and residences, the Romans created a variety of mosaics and murals.

Triumphal arches were erected to commemorate Roman military victories. Concrete: By perfecting the use of concrete, the Romans were able to construct tall, strong structures, some of which are still standing today and in quite good condition. Concrete in Roman times was made by mixing lime mortar, sand and stones with water; aside from concrete’s strength, the ease of transport of these materials made concrete construction viable. Reusable wooden frames were used to set the concrete in the manner required, and once set the concrete surface was often covered with plaster or stone panels. Arches, Vaults and Domes: The Romans wanted vast indoor spaces in which large numbers of people could comfortably congregate in, and so, to create these large unobstructed spaces, they replaced the old post and lintel system with the arch system. Using arches, barrel vaults, groin vaults and domes, they were able to roof large public buildings like public baths, basilicas and temples.

Columns: Columns were used both as functional and decorative architectural elements. Columns regularly featured in Roman temples and basilicas. In Roman temples, unlike the Greek ones, columns did not go around the temple’s main chamber; they were embedded in the walls along the sides and back of the chamber. The Romans used the Greek orders, Doric, Ionic and Corinthian, as well as the wholly Roman Tuscan and Composite orders. Elaborate Interior Decoration: This was particularly prevalent in late Roman architecture. The decoration was usually non-structural and veered towards the ornate. Mosaics: Mosaics were made of color stone chips set in cements and were used to decorate a wide range of private and public buildings. The Romans created intricate geometric designs, portraits, scenes and so on. Arch of Titus (c. After the fall of the Roman Empire, Roman architecture gradually faded out of the picture. Interest was revived during the Italian Renaissance, when all things Greek and Roman were once more in vogue, and the Western world saw a resurgence in classical architecture. The Washington Square Arch in New York City, derived from the Roman Triumphal Arch. Washington Monument in Baltimore, based on the Column of Trajan.

1. Men who have kids custody with them can rely onJaishree Banarjee v. Abhirup Banarjee (1997) 11 SCC 107 to get proceedings transferred in their favour. In the aforesaid judgement the supreme court relying on Para-17 and 18 as mentioned below. Availability of video conferencing facility. Availability of legal aid service. Deposit of cost for travel, lodging and boarding in terms of Order XXV CPC. E-mail address/phone number, if any, at which litigant from out station may communicate. Therefore the aforementioned guidelines were issued to all the High courts to make arrangements for video conferencing instead of transferring the petition, therefore dismissing all the transfer petition filed in the Hon’ble Supreme Court. For husband the judgement of Krishna Veni Nagam vs Harish Nigam is a valid defense for husbands for defending transfer petition supreme court. However this Judgement is referred to higher bench still there is hope for wife. Manipulation of court records. Petition filed without jurisdiction by reading petition only.

Should a single incident of incompetence or negligence be enough to warrant discipline? The Legal Profession blog is reporting on an interesting case in which the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals imposed sanctions on an attorney for what some members of the court thought was merely a single act of negligence. The case is called Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. Burke and it is available here. The case is interesting because it raises the question of whether minor transgressions should subject lawyers to discipline. Or, in other words, the question of at what point does a particular misconduct is “bad enough” to warrant discipline. The problem with the majority’s opinion is that it fails to define disciplinable incompetence with any clarity so as to allow for predictability. Single lawyer slipups are generally not ethical violations. They may expose the lawyer to professional negligence liability, but it has nothing to do with the lawyer’s ethics. Discipline should only be imposed when the lawyer’s error is intentional, reckless, repeated, or accompanied by some other misconduct like concealment. What the Chief Justice is saying that a single incident of incompetence would justify discipline only if it was intentional. But, if it was intentional, then it wouldn’t be negligent, would it? I don’t necessarily disagree that a single instance of negligent conduct, depending on the circumstances, does not need to result in discipline, but this general assertion by the Chief Justice seems to be too broad. Discipline can not be limited to instances of intentional conduct. The very notion of incompetence is based on the fact that an attorney may violate a rule of conduct without intent. Limiting the disciplinary system to the regulation of intentional conduct is not supported by the current regulatory approach and would be wrong and dangerous.

The answered this question and created an opportunity for appointment of counsel in various similar situations. This means that the highest court in the United States of America believes that a person who is ordered to pay child support has rights that are worthy of protection, especially against the threat of imprisonment. Civil contempt is the process by which a judge enforces an order of the court. If the judge finds a person in contempt they can be sentenced to pay a fine or spend time in jail. Most States require that the person accused of contempt be served with a motion that details the specific actions the court may believe are in contempt of court. The paying person must be served with the motion and notice of the hearing which must alert them to the fact that jail time is a possible sanction. After the evidence is presented the court will issue an order that includes the court’s findings regarding the amount that is delinquent as well as the person paying’s ability to pay. The court will also state whether they find the person paying in contempt or not and if so what the sentence is.

The judge has the ability to find someone guilty of contempt and order that they be jailed, but put off sentencing them for a period of time to give them a chance to redeem themselves. Generally when this happens the judge will order that child support payments be made as well as an additional amount to catch up on the arrears. The judge will set a time for everyone to return to examine whether the new schedule was followed or not. If not the person ordered to pay will be sent to jail for the time previously specified. Civil contempt is an important tool in the hands of the court to force parents with the ability to support their children to do so. There is nothing wrong with civil contempt proceedings so long as due process is followed. The problem is when due process isn’t followed. If the person paying does not have the ability to pay and the court jails them for contempt the judge is not using their power to coerce payment but to punish. This is especially likely to occur when the person ordered to pay does not have proper legal counsel. Without a lawyer to represent them they may not be able to properly present proof of their inability to pay to the court. Luckily the Supreme Court’s recent ruling puts safeguards into place by forcing the court systems to give attorneys to anyone threatened with jail time for not paying child support.

Position of the Supreme Court of India! The Supreme Court of India is the federal court, a final court of appeal and a guardian of the Constitution. The law declared by it, in the exercise of any of its jurisdiction under the Constitution is binding on all other courts within the territory of India. The Supreme Court has the powers to issue writs to enforce fundamental rights. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court may be classified under three heads. Original Jurisdiction means that no other court has the power to entertain a suit on these matters. These matters are confined to disputes between the Government of India and any other State or States of the Union or between two or more States. Writ Jurisdiction refers to the Supreme Court entertaining an application (under Art. Fundamental Rights. The aggrieved party need not come through a High Court by way of appeal.

By issuing a writ of Habeas Corpus the court can get a person released if it has been kept under unlawful custody even by the State. The writ of Prohibition gives an order to a subordinate court to stop proceedings in a case where in the opinion of the Supreme Court/the trial court has exceeded its jurisdiction. The writ of Certiorari has the effect of quashing an order already passed by a judicial or a quasi-judicial authority. The writ of Mandamus is in the nature of a command to a subordinate court that may have refused to exercise its jurisdiction. Quo-Warranto prevents an unlawful claimant from holding a superior public office. Advisory Jurisdiction involves giving its opinion on any question of law or fact of public importance as may be referred to it for consideration by the President. The opinion given by the Supreme Court is not binding on the government. The Supreme Court is responsible for ensuring that the High Courts and the Subordinate courts function efficiently and effectively. The decisions and decrees issued by the Supreme Court become Case law and are referred to by lawyers in their pleadings in similar situations. Thus the Supreme Court also functions as a Court of Record.

Laboratory analysts must now appear in court and submit themselves to cross-examination if their reports are admitted into evidence, according to a brand new ruling by the United States Supreme Court. Last week’s 5-4 ruling in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts mandates forensic analysts must appear in court under the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause which gives criminal defendants the right to confront witnesses. Crime lab analysts previously were rarely subpoenaed to testify about their reports. Justice Scalia questioned the reliability of forensic science as a whole, mentioning a recent National Academy of Science report which raised a number of issues. Each state is left to establish a procedure for contesting lab reports and calling analysts to court, so it is too soon to tell what the ruling’s full consequences are. This decision means a significant, future financial impact on crime labs by requiring analysts also to appear. It usually takes twelve to twenty-four months to hire and train a new analyst, even if one’s budget supports new hirings. Even considering that approximately 9 & 1/2 out of 10 cases end in a plea bargain, rights must be protected in that 5% that go to trial!

After the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Padilla v. United States, attorneys and courts are now well-versed about the necessity of informing defendants about the possible effects a guilty plea may have on their immigration status. A recent published decision by the Court in United States v. Ataya, discusses a related issue that many of us may have not considered and is worth a brief discussion. In this case, Mr. Ataya entered into a guilty plea to conspiring to commit health care fraud and wire fraud. Although his plea agreement waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, Mr. Ataya filed a notice of appeal from the judgment. The United States subsequently moved to the dismiss the appeal based on the waiver language. In a published decision, the Court noted several issues with the district court’s plea colloquy. In particular, it found that the district court did not inform Mr. Ataya that the plea agreement required him to pay restitution and a special assessment. Most importantly, however, the Court noted that the neither the plea agreement nor the district court told Mr. Ataya — a foreign national who subsequently became a naturalized U.S. While the Court may ultimately dismiss Mr. Ataya’s appeal, this case serves as a reminder that counsel should take care in advising immigrant clients who enter into plea agreements — even where such clients have become naturalized United States citizens. While attorneys might overlook this issue where their client has taken the steps to become a naturalized citizen, this case emphasizes that one cannot be too careful in such cases.

Utah is one of the most developed states of America when it comes to legal services. The number of efficient and experienced Utah attorneys and lawyers is enormous, and there many reputed law firms in the state. If you have recently landed in the state and have ended up in a complicated legal hassle, Utah lawyers will certainly come to your rescue. Most attorneys in Utah have vast experience in their field of legal matters and offer expert advice on almost all kinds of legal battles and disputes. If you are in search of a reputed law firm, then Shumway Van & Hansen, Chtd., is a name to go for. This law firm excels in handling almost all every case and has an exceptionally reputed bunch of lawyers and attorneys with them. The firm also has a branch office in the state of Nevada. Presently, most cases dealt by the company are related to dispute resolution and litigation.

Shumway Van & Hansen is remarkably different from many other firms of the state. The total wins of lawyers and attorneys in Utah, when combined, give an impressive sum that costs in millions. Lawyers in Utah can handle almost all kinds of financial and civil catastrophe. Apart from advising on legal matters, they guide in preparation of legal documents as well as help in representation of the same to various agencies. If you have never handled a legal matter, you might also need preparation before you face attorneys in Utah. Firstly, you need to be extremely well versed with your version of the case. Unless you can spell out the details clearly to your lawyer, he won’t be able to guide you. It is better get all the basic documents ready before contacting any contacting a law firm. Best attorneys in Utah are directly hired by law firms, so chances of getting a reliable lawyer in law firms in much more higher. You might also need to discuss the questioning aspect of the prosecution with the lawyer to ensure that you have the right confidence level to face all kinds of questions at the court. Utah attorneys have an outstanding reputation which often reflects in the ways they deal the case.

We are among the best law firms in the national capital and mainly deals in Criminal Laws, Civil Litigation, Family Laws and Business Laws. You can contact us for getting perfect solution to issues mentioned above. Our team of experts comprises of professional Supreme Court lawyers dealing with complex issues. The best part about contacting us is that we provide top notch services at affordable rates. The best part about our supreme court advocates is that they have always managed to deliver outstanding results and are always geared up to assist their customers with complete specialized and devoted approach. We also provide support for corporate law, criminal law, affidavits and power of attorney. We offer genuine and transparent services and always ensure that excellent results are delivered to our clients. You can contact us any time by logging on to our website and our team of best Supreme Court lawyers in Delhi will ensure that they get back to you with almost every possible data that is obtainable.

In last few years we have served many well-regarded clients with their cases and have gained large number of admirations from our clients. Legal consequences are such things, which may arise anytime to any person. And also there are some of the arenas where it is compulsory to clear legal matters before starting a new venture. So, lawyers are very important persons and the best professional Supreme Court advocates make it easy for their clients to get out of a legal issue without much effort with their valuable support and working skills. At times there are cases which are fairly multifaceted and are needed to be administered with complete specialized and cautious approach. Our top Supreme Court advocates in Delhi can easily deal with such delicate matters and promise our customers about delivering best outcomes as early as possible. With the dedication and hard work of top Supreme Court lawyers in Delhi, we have successfully implemented a lot of projects. This is the reason the number of customers are growing on a daily basis. In fact there are loads of big business houses and well-known personalities who have our expert services. The Supreme Court lawyers in Delhi always trust in coming up with distinctive and pioneering solutions and with their established track record of victory, they have become the best choice to handle diverse cases.

Question: Is there any way to shorten the 90 day waiting period after the nominal Rhode Island Divorce. Answer. No, the 90 day waiting period is mandated by Rhode Island Law. Question: Is there any way to shorten the 90 day waiting period after the nominal Rhode Island Divorce. Answer. No, the 90 day waiting period is mandated by Rhode Island Law. A Final Judgment of Divorce cannot be granted by a Rhode Island Family Court Judge until the 91st day after the nominal Divorce hearing. The only exception to this rule is for divorce complaints granted based on the grounds of living separate and apart for a space of 3 years which has a substantially lesser waiting period. Question: Why is there a 90 day waiting period in Rhode Island? Answer: The intent of the statute is that parties may reconcile during the 90 days and decide not to get divorced. Question: I am in a rush to get a divorce, do I have wait until the nominal divorce hearing which is typically 65 days after filing?