79 research outputs found

    Collateral Estoppel

    Get PDF
    The doctrine of collateral estoppel involves the use of an old judgment in a new action to prevent the relitigation of issues resolved by that old judgment. At common law, use of the doctrine required that the party using collateral estoppel and the party against whom it was used be the same as the parties to the prior judgment. This common law requirement of mutuality has been relaxed and since the United States Supreme Court\u27s 1979 decision in ParklaneHoisery Co. v. Shore, the strict common law requirement of mutuality has all but completely vanished. In Parklane the Court sanctioned the use of collateral estoppel by a plaintiff who was a stranger to the original suit against a defendant who was party to that suit. The courts\u27 search for fair results and judicial economy in the application of the doctrine led to this application of the doctrine in circumstances in which the parties were not mutual. This note traces the un- steady course which the doctrine of collateral estoppel traveled before Parklane. The significance of the Court\u27s decision in Parklane is then analyzed. Finally, post-Parklane applications of collateral estoppel are discussed, including the effect of the use of collateral estoppel on the seventh amendment right to jury trial and its impact on substantive areas of law

    Prospectus, March 2, 1994

    Get PDF
    https://spark.parkland.edu/prospectus_1994/1003/thumbnail.jp

    Imprints, Vol. 3

    Get PDF
    Imprints, Vol. 3 Laura Lundgren, Stephen F Austin State UniversitySandra L. Standley, Stephen F Austin State UniversityMelissa Miller, Stephen F Austin State UniversityCurtis Simmons, Stephen F Austin State UniversityVaughn Hamilton, Stephen F Austin State UniversitySteve Geissen, Stephen F Austin State UniversityEdward Shelton, Stephen F Austin State UniversityJames L. Choron, Stephen F Austin State UniversityAnderson Kelley, Stephen F Austin State UniversityAndrew J. Urbanus, Stephen F Austin State UniversityGordon Garrett Conner, Stephen F Austin State UniversityJames Chionsini Jr., Stephen F Austin State UniversityPaul M. Thomason, Stephen F Austin State UniversityCarol McBrayerJessica Anton, Stephen F Austin State University Download Download Full Text (5.7 MB) Description Imprints is the official publication for Sigma Tau Delta, the honorary English fraternity. The editors welcome creative works submitted by contributors and also publish winners of the annual T. E. Ferguson Writing Contest. Especially welcom are poems, fiction pieces and essays of no more than 5,000 words in length. At this time, we would like to express our gratitude to David Whitescarver, Sigma Tau Delta faculty advisor, for his unrelenting optimism and valuable help in the preparation of this journal

    Interpersonal and affective dimensions of psychopathic traits in adolescents : development and validation of a self-report instrument

    Get PDF
    We report the development and psychometric evaluations of a self-report instrument designed to screen for psychopathic traits among mainstream community adolescents. Tests of item functioning were initially conducted with 26 adolescents. In a second study the new instrument was administered to 150 high school adolescents, 73 of who had school records of suspension for antisocial behavior. Exploratory factor analysis yielded a 4-factor structure (Impulsivity α = .73, Self-Centredness α = .70, Callous-Unemotional α = .69, and Manipulativeness α = .83). In a third study involving 328 high school adolescents, 130 with records of suspension for antisocial behaviour, competing measurement models were evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis. The superiority of a first-order model represented by four correlated factors that was invariant across gender and age was confirmed. The findings provide researchers and clinicians with a psychometrically strong, self-report instrument and a greater understanding of psychopathic traits in mainstream adolescents

    Invisible Disabilities in Education and Employment

    Get PDF
    More than 1 in 5 UK adults are disabled. Disabilities that are not immediately obvious are known as ‘invisible disabilities’, such as mental health conditions, neurodivergences and energy-limiting conditions.1 Evidence on this topic is limited as most research focuses on disability in general, or on a few specific conditions. Those with invisible disabilities may face challenges due to a lack of awareness and difficulty accessing support and services. Strategies aimed at increasing access and inclusion for adults with invisible disabilities in employment, and in higher and further education, could include: increasing awareness and understanding via training and reciprocal mentoring schemes; introducing ‘passports’ for transfer of adjustments to avoid repeated disclosure; inclusive design that considers sensory and informational barriers to access; maintaining online access to events and services post-pandemic; updating policy and guidance with examples of less recognised invisible disabilities; and promoting flexible working and learning arrangements. The 2021 National Disability Strategy set out the actions the Government would take to improve the lives of disabled people, including making workplaces more inclusive and accessible. However, the High Court ruled in 2022 that the strategy was “unlawful due to inadequate consultation”, which the Government has sought permission to appeal. Fourteen policies in the strategy are currently paused

    Adjunctive rifampicin for Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (ARREST): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≄18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≀96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18-45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference -1·4%, 95% CI -7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68-1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3-4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005). INTERPRETATION: Adjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment
    • 

    corecore