Attorney Locator

Lawyer Profiles

Bail & Bonds

Cases

Codes & Statutes

Crimes

Courts

Government

Elections

Politics

Law Enforcement

Law Firms

Law Specialties

Law Books

Law Dictionary

Law History

Law Libraries

Law Schools

Law Students

Law Tech

Legal Forms

Legal Resources

Legal Support

Legal Topics

Mediation & Arbitration

Members

Partner With Us

Insider's Guide to the U. S. Supreme Court/
Powered By ENCYC-LAW-PEDIA® Search Engine
The Legal Engine That Can®. .

LAWPEDIA® FRESH LAW LINKS™

The U.S. Supreme Court: An Insider's Guide LawPedia® has added this new section to its United States Supreme Court news reports for an insider's look into current cases, law, topics, and issues that are being presented to the Court. The new section, U.S. Supreme Court: Insider's Guide will include current profiles on the people, justices, judges and lawyers making the news. Special Weekend Barrister At Court Edition. PART ONE

PART ONE: ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI The United States Supreme Court is not required to hear every case presented to it. In cases that are heard by a three-judge United States district court (a practice that formerly was somewhat common but has been limited to very few cases by legislation in recent years), there is a right of appeal directly to the Supreme Court, although the Court may dispose of these appeals by summary order if it does not believe they are important enough for full briefing and argument. In most instances, however, the party must petition the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. By custom, certiorari is granted on the vote of four of the nine Justices. In most cases, the writ is denied; the Supreme Court normally only considers matters of national or constitutional importance. If the Court refuses to grant certiorari, it does not comment on the merits of the case; the decision of the lower court stands unchanged as if Supreme Court review had not been requested.

In one case example, recently, MILES J. ZAREMSKI, Counsel of Record, of Kamensky Rubinstein Hochman and Delott, LLP, lawfirm in Chicago, filed his PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI with the United States Supreme Court on behalf of his client, Carolyn G. Kochert. The Petition is an outstanding example of the high quality and amount of legal work that goes into cases prepared and brought before the highest court. This case presents two very important issues of national concern to lawyers practicing in the federal courts: [1] Whether lower courts err when they meld the standards for summary judgment under Federal Rules Civil Procedure 56 and the relevance and reliability requirements for admissibility under Federal Rules Evidence 702?; and [2] Whether, in order to clarify the distinction between admissibility decisions and evidence sufficient to grant a summary judgment, courts have an obligation to give reasons – which cannot include weighing the testimony – why admissible expert evidence that reaches all material facts necessary to establish a claim for relief under applicable law is not sufficient to avoid summary judgment? Typically, a lawyer practicing before the U.S. Supreme Court would have a high degree of experience in the law, and usually special training in the area of practice. Read or download a copy of the Full Petition for Certiorari [PDF] as filed with the U.S. Supreme Court. GO TO PART TWO.

LAWPEDIA® UPDATE: Mr. Zaremski and his client learned on February 20, 2007, that the U.S. Supreme Court will not grant certiorari in this case. Lower Court Decision: KOCHERT vs. GREATER LAFAYETTE HEALTH SERVICES, INC., 463 F.3d 710 (7th Cir. 2006)

LAWYER PROFILE: MILES J. ZAREMSKI - Miles has over three decades of experience as a litigator and lead trial counsel, having served health care providers and institutional clients coast to coast. He has represented those in the practice of medicine and health care in multimillion dollar professional liability exposures, medical staff/hospital disputes, restrictive covenant issues, antitrust violations affecting medical practitioners, administrative and regulatory concerns, such as peer review, and medical products/devices and insurance coverage disputes. Mr. Zaremski has been before the U.S. Supreme Court nine times, and various state supreme and federal courts, representing amici in a variety of issues from medical ethics issues to allowing expert testimony into evidence. One of his cases is also already among seminal ones nationwide addressing discoverability of medical documents under state peer review statutes. His writings have been cited by state supreme courts as well. He has also authored articles and chapters within medical-legal literature, including two books in the field. Mr. Zaremski can be reached at: mzaremski@gmail.com

---

LawPedia® with Encyc-Law-Pedia® Search Engine
THE LEGAL ENGINE THAT CAN®. --

LawPedia® - the Law Encyclopedia - welcomes our many new visitors, attorneys, law students, law firms, courts, law schools, law enforcement officials, as well as LawPedia® members and sponsors. Please check back regularly for our frequent law news links and ongoing legal updates. We are engaged in collecting, organizing and compiling the world's most comprehensive Law related source of information for publication on the Internet. Contributors & Subscrribers. Our Mission: To create the complete and definitive source of Law information available anywhere. Our goal is to be your source for all Law related information. Visitors access and receive up-to-date information about Law and current legal developments through our Barrister's Daily Legal Report law news section. Our ENCYC-LAW-PEDIA® search engine and Legal Research Index (LRsI) guides you to all law related information, web sites, and other resources available on the Internet. Hosted by the Original Internet Encyclopedia.