RU-vid site of law professor Ira Steven Nathenson. Videos on learning federal Civil Procedure and other topics.
PLEASE READ AND RESPECT THESE DISCLAIMERS:
This is legal information of general interest and does not constitute legal advice of any kind.
I am not your lawyer and you are not my client. Writing or contacting me does not make you my client.
If you need an attorney, please hire one.
Therefore, please do NOT contact me, either here or otherwise, to seek legal advice or legal representation. Please do not be offended, but I will not respond to such inquiries at all.
@9:23 you said the answer was "C.", however, you showed the answer highlighted as "B.": the correct answer according to the standard for the movant concerning a summary judgment motion. Thanks.
Atty Little maliciously excluded me from knowing his conspirared adverse strategy. Because of his Malfeasance manipulated Malpractices, Fraud Concealment, illegal Dismisal, suppressed supported evidence, and conflict of interest with PRL Legal Counsel, etc.
Atty Little maliciously drafted lies, omitted and incident in my EEOC'S Investigation without my knowledge. I provided Atty Little 2 Chronological timelines which he suppressed to place in my Client File. He adversely refused my request to receive a copy via phone conversation. He also denied me the right to read, correct or confirm what he falsely wrote and / or misconstrued. As one can see in his statement, my signature and signoff were intentionally breached/blocked. The client, Helene was excluded/oppressed, because Atty Little was adversely litigating with PRL Legal Counsel. Fraudulent Misrepresentation and Fraudulent Concealment of Witness/Complainant Helene Webster.
Greetings Mr. Nathanson I still not sure if your right or wrong in professing treason law's in our effort of Counter-City. But, I notice on proximaty 5:19 you mention P.D.Q staffing and notwithstanding, they are responsible for the rough draft Operation just cause, what does that mean? Nathanson v. Murphy, 132 Cal. App. 2d 363, 282 P.2d 174, 1955 Cal. App. LEXIS 2196 & Candyman Kitchens v. Indeed, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121754, 2020 WL 3803936
I just wanted to let you know that I have watched your videos over the past 2 days and you have helped me so much to study for my Civ Pro exam tomorrow!
Your lecture makes sense, except for one thing poverty poverty is the number one problem in this country. How do you account for something that could be a remedy? Otherwise, dumb should be against the law, your right about the problem though. Jones v. Riot Hosp. Grp. LLC, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90241, 2023 WL 3603684
I wanted to get mad at you at first, but something was revealed that is total madness with regards to the principal, he wants a conventional, notwithstanding. And, he haves real bad issues with his family especially his females, maybe you can help in some way, but evidently, we don't want to lead with that kind of b/s. It will hurt the world, I am not a donkey in account of earning it for them. My family fought thru all the American wars, I don't want to be the level of the street, it is about honor for this country -America.
ADA title ll torts access ♿ to the court account mizell vr Hamilton mizell vr neuss mizell vr Hernandez x3 appeal pharma poparus disabled prosecutor prose Marshalls vagabond code for president 💯
Good going Mr. Nathanson I would've agreed and I bet you had a following that possibly was questionable in their merrits. But I think we should be reasonable in helping people to give them a head start in developing their culture. Otherwise, Americans will always be in the way of helpless people. Thank you Lisa
aight my brother I love your teaching!!! I will move for discovery and then file for summary judgement!!! I have a sure case but will allow for the opposing party to submit air then ill move so my summary judgement don't get tangled up.. sucks being pro se, but thats why im here
