I'd love an example in the 16%?

If the trial judge had simply and explicity said they were not credible re. The caretaking testimony, does that change the result? Doesn't the trial judge get wide latitude in credibility determinations?

Trump's promise to staple green cards to diplomas wasn't a lie, he just wasn't going to allow anyone to go to college anymore.

I really like using Strava heatmaps to illuminate paths that other mapping tools miss entirely. I also like komoot. A lot of people use Ride with GPS, but I haven't tried it personally.

Now certainly the revolving door exacerbates the effect I just described. New regulators have relationships with old regulators (who now happen to represent the utility). And I could be totally wrong.

I agree that utilities have outsized influence, but I don't think the revolving door is the reason why. In my experience the people appointed to be utility regulators are casual observers of the space--non-experts. Utilities then present themselves as the first face you see to help them "learn".

Everyone forgets it's actually possessive. Amicu's brief.

Catsups?

I might modify the first cite to Decision at 5 (Ex. 6), and then use Id. So long as the finding was itself sourced from the Exhibit. Otherwise no id.

Pennsylvania's court website doesn't let you read opinions outside of the US. You can get to the page, but no reading what the court said. www.pacourts.us/courts/supre...

Surprizing

Ahh, this gets a lot of people but there's a simple answer: they interact in accordance with the laws of physics. Hope this helps.

This is honestly not the worst idea.

Thanks! Started reading it right after I prematurely asked.

Would it be possible for state courts to prohibit state prosecutors from relying on the legality of a search under federal law?

Seeing as there's only 2 of the same Commissioners on FERC as the primary order (one of whom voted no), i'd say modify is the better bet.