FN90

From HORSE - Holistic Operational Readiness Security Evaluation.
Revision as of 12:25, 28 February 2009 by Mdpeters (talk | contribs) (New page: State v. Allen, 260 Kan. 107, 917 P.2d 848 (1996); People v. Versaggi, 83 N.Y.2d 123, 608 N.Y.S.2d 155, 629 N.E.2d 1034 (1994). As to billing and collection procedures, see Setting the Fe...)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

State v. Allen, 260 Kan. 107, 917 P.2d 848 (1996); People v. Versaggi, 83 N.Y.2d 123, 608 N.Y.S.2d 155, 629 N.E.2d 1034 (1994).

As to billing and collection procedures, see Setting the Fee, 1 Am. Jur. Trials 93.

Motion to exclude evidence is discussed in § 168.

Modern status of rules as to use of motion in limine or similar preliminary motion to secure exclusion of prejudicial evidence or reference to prejudicial matters, 63 A.L.R. 3d 311. Blumenkopf, The Motion In Limine: An Effective Procedural Device With No Material Downside Risk, 16 New Eng LR 171 (1981); Graham, Evidence and Trial Advocacy Workshop: Rulings on Admissibility of Evidence Outside the Hearing of the Jury—"Motions in Limine," 17 Crim L Bull 60 (no. 1 1981).