DOCSLIB.ORG

Examining Witnesses MICHAEL E. TIGAR SECTION of LITIGATION

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Examining Witnesses MICHAEL E. TIGAR SECTION of LITIGATION Examining Witnesses MICHAEL E. TIGAR SECTION OF LITIGATION American Bar Association This book is dedicated to my children, and their children Excerpt from Stevie Smith, Collected Poems of Stevie Smith. © 1972 by Stevie Smith. Reprinted with permission of New Directions Publishing Corporation. exwit2master.doc, 12/15/13 7:12:51 a12/p12, page 1, DRAFT, NOT PUBLISHED Contents Preface Acknowledgments Chapter One The Theory of the Case: Dead Reckoning, Gestalt, and the Closing Argument Deciders Perceive Whole Stories The Way You Tell It Makes All the Difference Structure and Order Proof of Facts The Essence of Direct and Cross Are You Sure? You Always Navigate by Dead Reckoning Chapter Two Direct Examination: Friendly Folks Why Direct Examination Is Difficult The Story Within the Story Preparing the Friendly Witness Beginning Strong Stating and Restating Your Theme – Helping the Jurors Direct Examination Organization Loops Prologues and Transitions Demeanor, Tone, and Movement Deconstruction (Without a Yellow Pad) Two Examples Leading Questions and Avoiding Narrative Chapter Three Direct Examination: Neutral Fact Witnesses Are There Neutral Fact Witnesses? The Partisan The Record Keeper The Bystander The Professional The Journalist Chapter Four Direct Examination: Difficult Attributes The Difficult Direct Examination Foreign Language Testimony and Related Problems The Child Witness The Witness Who Was Wrong The Witness Who Doesn’t Want to Be There The Character Witness Chapter Five Direct Examination: Your Client Does the Client Testify? The Criminal Defendant as Witness exwit2master.doc, 12/15/13 7:12:51 a12/p12, page 2, DRAFT, NOT PUBLISHED Preparing the Client to Testify The Client on the Stand Chapter Six Demonstrative Evidence and Illustrative Materials: Say It with Pictures Basic Principles Agreement or Ruling? Basic Publication Strategy Skepticism About Hardware Read It ELMOs And Overhead Projectors Multiple Copies Large Posterboard Charts The Object Itself Pad or Blackboard? Models Video Images CD-ROM And DVD-ROM Document Storage and Retrieval: Another Cautionary Tale Chapter Seven Adverse Examination: Inviting the Enemy in to Dine Rules and Cases When and Whether to Call an Adverse Witness How to Do It Chapter Eight Cross-Examination: Venial Violations of the Ten Commandments The Ten Commandments The True Rules of Cross Control The Theory of Minimal Contradiction Meaning Perception Memory Veracity Minimal Contradiction Redux Witness as Object, Witness as Observer “Liar” Chapter Nine Cross-Examination: Difficult Witnesses, Witnesses with Difficulties The Eyewitness The Representative The Informer Character Witnesses Special Care Witnesses Foreign Language Witnesses Chapter Ten A Real World Cross-Examination, Annotated Chapter Eleven Cross-Examination: Preparing Your Witnesses for Its Rigors exwit2master.doc, 12/15/13 7:12:51 a12/p12, page 3, DRAFT, NOT PUBLISHED The Locker Room Speech Scrimmage--The Ground Rules Is There a Gentler Way? Perception, Memory, Meaning, Veracity How to Scrimmage Chapter Twelve Expert Witness: Soft Subjects--Choosing and Presenting Your Expert Hard Expertise and Soft Expertise Materiality Relevancy Rules about Experts Scientific, Technical or Other Specialized Knowledge Facts or Data Principles and Methods Reliably Applied Demonstrative Evidence Choosing a Testifying or Shadow Expert Search Techniques How to Prepare Yourself for the Search The Nontestifying Expert Preparing Your Expert to Testify Direct Examination Begins: Biographical Information Qualifying the Expert Introducing the Themes Making the Point Arrogance Chapter Thirteen Expert Witness: Soft Subjects--Cross-Examination “Someone” Are You Competent? About This Subject? How Did You Get Here? Will It Assist the Trier of Fact? Is It Reliable? “Who Was Not There” “But Who for a Fee” “Will Gladly Imagine What It Must Have Been Like" The “Other Expert” Cross Chapter Fourteen Expert Witness: Hard Subjects--Choosing and Presenting Your Expert The Search Do You Need an Expert? Presentation Chapter Fifteen Expert Witness: Hard Subjects--Cross-Examination Is It a Specialty? Make the Expert’s Conclusions Irrelevant exwit2master.doc, 12/15/13 7:12:51 a12/p12, page 4, DRAFT, NOT PUBLISHED Make the Expert’s Conclusion Doubtful Liars and Very Badly Mistaken People “No Questions”? Chapter Sixteen Closing Thoughts: Dignity--Yours and the Witness’s An Anecdote about Dignity Who Are You? The Jurors Answer Witnesses and Dignity Levels of Formality--Some Cautionary Words Seven Deadly Sins Speaker and Hearer: Context Concluding Words Bibliography exwit2master.doc, 12/15/13 7:12:51 a12/p12, page 5, DRAFT, NOT PUBLISHED Preface This book is by a trial lawyer for trial lawyers. I have been trying cases for thirty-five years and writing about trials for nearly that long. For nearly fifty years, I have been soaking up as much trial lore as I could. I believe that fair trials in the adversary system are the best way to settle disputes that cannot be settled amicably. Most cases do settle, but the best settlements are made only after the lawyer has understood the case enough to try it. These days, too many judges are hiding in their chambers and, with the help of law clerks, scratching out written responses to pleadings, instead of getting on the bench and making decisions. Judge Patrick Higginbotham has documented that federal “trial judges” are in fact trying fewer cases than in the past. This failure to use open court hearings to resolve disputes saps confidence in the system that calls itself justice. This is a second edition. Some subjects, such as expert witnesses, have been changed in significant ways by United States Supreme Court decisions and amendments to the rules of evidence. Since the first edition, I have tried cases to juries and judges, taught advocacy, written about persuasion, and reflected on the themes in the first edition. My colleagues and friends mostly concurred that a second edition was a good idea. I have reworked every chapter, and added much new material. I continue to believe that “the great advocates of this and every other time in recorded history have been students of society and not carnival barkers.” This statement covers a lot of territory. For purposes of this book, which deals with the art, science, and technique of advocacy, it means that to win trials, you have to understand how jurors and judges are persuaded by the drama of evidence and the rhetoric of lawyers. In this book, I have tried to provide more than recipes. With a recipe, you can cook something. With theory, techniques, and skill--informed by experience--you are a cook. I believe that good lawyering can be taught. We are talking about skill in this book. Mark Twain, in an 1870 story called “Science and Luck,” tells the story of a dozen men on trial for running a game of chance, to wit, “seven-up” or “old sledge.” Their lawyer, old Jim Sturgis, brought witnesses to say that it was a game of skill, but deacons and dominies summoned by the prosecutor pronounced it a game of chance. So Sturgis convinced the judge to put four deacons and two dominies on the jury, along with six old gamblers, give them candles and a couple of decks of cards, and “just abide by the result.” As the deliberations went on, various of the “chance” jurors sent word into court to borrow money from their friends. At dawn, the jury returned its unanimous verdict: We, the jury in the case of Commonwealth of Kentucky vs. John Wheeler, et al., have carefully considered the points of the case, and tested the merits of the several theories advanced, and do hereby unanimously decide that the game commonly known as old sledge or seven-up is eminently a game of science and not of chance. In demonstration whereof it is hereby and herein stated, iterated, reiterated, set forth, and made manifest that, during the entire night, the “chance” men never won a game or turned a jack, although both feats were common and frequent to the opposition; and furthermore, in support of this our verdict, we call attention to the significant fact that the “chance” men are all busted, and the “science” men have got the money. It is the deliberate opinion of this jury, that the “chance” theory concerning seven-up is a pernicious doctrine, and calculated to inflict untold suffering and pecuniary loss upon any community that takes stock in it. exwit2master.doc, 12/15/13 7:12:51 a12/p12, page 6, DRAFT, NOT PUBLISHED Good lawyering is not a game of chance, or luck, even though both of these may play a role. Day in and day out, in the tournament of trial, skill wins out. Mostly, this book is about jury trials, civil and criminal. The American jury has taken a lot of criticism; I think it is the best way to resolve the cases that can’t be settled. You will find, however, that persuasive techniques are the same whether a judge or jury is deciding. Lawyers who think that they can present their case more “neutrally” to a judge will quickly learn from that mistake, though at their clients’ expense. Indeed, you can usefully master the theory and skill of persuasion even if you are not a trial lawyer. Historically, the study of rational and nonrational persuasion was the work of philosophers and dramatists before it became the province of lawyers. Today, as I show in Chapter One, social scientists and students of language contribute to our understanding of trials; representatives of these disciplines can usefully be retained to help prepare for specific cases. Authors think they write clearly enough that nobody needs a road map through the thicket of their words. Editors, who fancy themselves advocates for readers, think otherwise. The editors usually win. Here is a road map. This book is designed so that young lawyers and law students can read it from cover to cover and see how one moves from meeting your client, to seeing your case, to presenting your case.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Michigan Rules of Evidence Table of Contents
    Michigan Rules of Evidence Table of Contents RULES 101–106 .......................................................................................................... 4 Rule 101. Scope. ....................................................................................................... 4 Rule 102. Purpose. ................................................................................................... 4 Rule 103. Rulings on Evidence. ............................................................................... 4 Rule 104. Preliminary Questions. ........................................................................... 5 Rule 105. Limited Admissibility. ............................................................................. 5 Rule 106. Remainder of or Related Writings or Recorded Statements. ................. 5 RULES 201–202 .......................................................................................................... 5 Rule 201. Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts. .................................................... 5 Rule 202. Judicial Notice of Law. ............................................................................ 6 RULES 301–302 .......................................................................................................... 6 Rule 301. Presumptions in Civil Actions and Proceedings. ................................... 6 Rule 302. Presumptions in Criminal Cases. ........................................................... 6 RULES 401–411 .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • What Lawyers, What Edge? Michael E
    Hofstra Law Review Volume 36 | Issue 2 Article 16 2007 What Lawyers, What Edge? Michael E. Tigar Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Tigar, Michael E. (2007) "What Lawyers, What Edge?," Hofstra Law Review: Vol. 36: Iss. 2, Article 16. Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr/vol36/iss2/16 This document is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hofstra Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Tigar: What Lawyers, What Edge? WHAT LAWYERS, WHAT EDGE? Michael E. Tigar* I. INTRODUCTION When Monroe Freedman called and said that the conference was to be titled "Lawyering at the Edge," my response was like that of Professor Steven Gillers. I said, "the edge of what?" An edge implies a shape, an area, and theoretically on this surface, we are to localize lawyer behavior, and, again as Steven Gillers recognized, the rules cannot define the edge. They simply describe ways of seeing it. These ways of seeing or interpreting are influenced by the independence of the bar as an institution and the requirement of lawyer autonomy, as well as by the content of the rules themselves. Some of the rules, such as the ones that require zeal on behalf of clients when we are engaged in advocacy, operate under social and historical circumstances that make it inevitable that the edge will be difficult to define.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.08 “Open Door” Evidence (1) a Party
    4.08 “Open Door” Evidence (1) A party may “open the door” to the introduction by an opposing party of evidence that would otherwise be inadmissible when in the presentation of argument, cross-examination of a witness, or other presentation of evidence the party has given an incomplete and misleading impression on an issue. (2) A trial court must exercise its discretion to decide whether a party has “opened the door” to otherwise inadmissible evidence. In so doing, the trial court should consider whether, and to what extent, the evidence or argument claimed to “open the door” is incomplete and misleading and what, if any, otherwise inadmissible evidence is reasonably necessary to explain, clarify, or otherwise correct an incomplete and misleading impression. (3) To assure the proper exercise of the court’s discretion and avoid the introduction of otherwise inadmissible evidence, the recommended practice is for a party to apply to the trial court for a ruling on whether the door has been opened before proceeding forward, and the court should so advise the parties before taking evidence. Note Subdivisions (1) and (2) recite the long-settled “open door” principle in New York, as primarily explained in People v Melendez (55 NY2d 445 [1982]); People v Rojas (97 NY2d 32, 34 [2001]); People v Massie (2 NY3d 179 [2004]); and People v Reid (19 NY3d 382 [2012]). Melendez dealt with the issue of whether the defense had opened the door to permit the prosecutor to explore an aspect of the investigation that would not otherwise have been admissible. The Court began by noting that, when an “opposing party ‘opens the door’ on cross-examination to matters not touched upon during the direct examination, a party has the right on redirect to explain, clarify and fully elicit [the] question only partially examined on cross-examination.” (Melendez at 451 1 [internal quotation marks and citation omitted].) Argument to the jury or other presentation of evidence also may open the door to the admission of otherwise inadmissible evidence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Basic Elements of Direct Examination
    The basic elements of direct examination * By: F. Dennis Saylor IV and Daniel I. Small ) February 24, 2017 In theory, at least, an effective direct examination should be one of the easiest things to accomplish in the courtroom. The witness is almost always friendly; in fact, it’s often your own client. The testimony is almost always entirely predictable. And the goal is usually pretty straightforward: telling your side of the story. Nonetheless, too many direct examinations are neither as clear nor as compelling as they ought to be. Maybe that’s because too many lawyers view direct as a simple, almost mechanical, task: Just put your witness on the stand and press “play.” But a truly effective direct examination cannot be created on the fly; it requires careful organization and planning. Moreover, it requires discipline — in particular, the discipline to ask questions carefully, without leading and without excess “noise.” In our upcoming columns, we will talk about different parts of the challenge of effective direct examination. But let’s begin at the beginning. There are six basic elements of an effective direct examination: (1) introducing the witness, (2) setting the stage, (3) telling the story, (4) showing the evidence, (5) defusing problems and (6) concluding effectively. 1. Introducing the witness Most lawyers ask a handful of questions up front to introduce and “humanize” the witness. A few questions about a witness’s background (such as residence, occupation, family or education) are normally permitted, even if technically they aren’t always entirely relevant. But be careful not to overdo this.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Leading Questions During Direct Examination
    Florida State University Law Review Volume 23 Issue 2 Article 4 Fall 1995 Using Leading Questions During Direct Examination Charles W. Ehrhardt Florida State University College of Law Stephanie J. Young Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr Part of the Evidence Commons, and the State and Local Government Law Commons Recommended Citation Charles W. Ehrhardt & Stephanie J. Young, Using Leading Questions During Direct Examination, 23 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 401 (1995) . https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr/vol23/iss2/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Florida State University Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. USING LEADING QUESTIONS DURING DIRECT EXAMINATION CHARLES W. EHRHARDT* AND STEPHANIE J. YOUNG"* I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................... 401 II. BEFORE ADOPTION OF FLORIDA'S EVIDENCE CODE ......... 402 A. An Exception for Leading Questions on Direct Examination ................................................ 402 B. Voucher Rule Barred Impeaching a Party'sOwn Witness ....................................................... 404 III. ADOPTION OF FLORIDA'S EVIDENCE CODE ................... 405 A. Section 90.608: Impeaching an Adverse Witness... 405 B. Section 90.612(3): Use of Leading Questions ....... 406 C. 1990 Amendment to Section 90.608 ................... 408 D. Evidence Code Amendments Make Rule Unnecessary................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Draft Policy Recommendation on Expert Testimony
    NATIONAL COMMISSION ON FORENSIC SCIENCE PRESENTATION OF EXPERT TESTIMONY POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Experts should be asked to identify and explain the theoretical and factual basis for any conclusion and the reasoning on which the conclusion is based — and any limitations of their conclusions. 2. Experts should present testimony in a manner that accurately and fairly conveys the significance of their conclusions, avoiding unexplained or undefined technical terms or words of art. 3. Experts should remain neutral, and attorneys should respect this neutrality. 4. Experts should not testify beyond their expertise and should also appreciate the difference between testimony that the witness may give as an expert and testimony that the same witness may give as a lay/fact witness.1 5. Experts should not testify on direct or redirect examination concerning case-specific conclusions not contained in the report(s)/documentation submitted in discovery — unless in fair response to issues raised on cross-examination. If an expert changes his or her opinion, a supplementary report should be submitted except where the change is occasioned by new information, presented during testimony and not previously available to the witness. 1 The same witness may provide testimony as both an expert or a lay witness. The two roles need to be distinguished. The Federal Rules do “not distinguish between expert and lay witnesses, but rather between expert and lay testimony. Certainly it is possible for the same witness to provide both lay and expert testimony in a single case.” FED. R. EVID. 701 advisory committee’s note (2000). 1 6. Experts should not testify concerning conclusions that are beyond the limits of a laboratory’s testing protocols.
    [Show full text]
  • New York Evidentiary Foundations Randolph N
    digitalcommons.nyls.edu Faculty Scholarship Books 1993 New York Evidentiary Foundations Randolph N. Jonakait H. Baer E. S. Jones E. Imwinkelried Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/fac_books Part of the Evidence Commons Recommended Citation Jonakait, Randolph N.; Baer, H.; Jones, E. S.; and Imwinkelried, E., "New York Evidentiary Foundations" (1993). Books. Book 4. http://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/fac_books/4 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Books by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@NYLS. New York .Evidentiary Foundations RANDOLPH N. JONAKAIT HAROLD BAER, JR. E. STEWART JONES, JR. EDWARD J. IMWINKELRIED THE MICHIE COMPANY Law Publishers CHARLOTIESVILLE, Vlli:GINIA CoPYRIGHT ~ 1H93 BY THE MICHIE COMI'ANY Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 93-77731 ISBN: 1-55834-058-0 All rights reserved. lllllllllllllllllllllllllm IIIII SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Table of Contents . v Chapter 1. Introduction . 1 Chapter 2. Related Procedures .. .. .. .. ... ... .. .. .. .. .. .. ..... 11 Chapter 3. The Competency ofWitnesses .......................... 25 Chapter 4. Authentication . 45 Chapter 5. Limitations on Credibility Evidence . 99 Chapter 6. Limitations on Evidence That Is Relevant to the Merits of the Case . 129 Chapter 7. Privileges and Similar Doctrines . 155 Chapter 8. The Best Evidence Rule . 199 Chapter 9. Opinion Evidence ......................................... 225 Chapter 10. The Hearsay Rule, Its Exemptions, and Its Excep- tions ......................................................... 241 Chapter 11. Substitutes for Evidence . .. .. .. .... .. .. .. .. ..... ... .. 315 Index ......................................................................... 329 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Summary Table of Contents 111 Chapter 1. Introduction .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 · A. Introduction . 1 B. Laying a Foundation - In General . 2 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Trial Witnesses, Un-Lead the Questions
    Trial Witnesses, Un-Lead the Questions Prepared by: Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm Persuasion Strategies - a service of Holland & Hart LLP Published on www.lorman.com - May 2019 Trial Witnesses - Un-Lead the Questions, ©2019 Lorman Education Services. All Rights Reserved. Trial Witnesses, Un-Lead the Questions Written by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm When testifying, there are some situations where a “less is more” rule applies. In a deposition, for example, you don’t want to aid the other side, and will often prefer conciseness. However, when undergoing cross-examination before a jury in trial, less isn’t more…it is less. That is, if you limit yourself to simple “yes” answers, then you have less control (with your adversary choosing all the words) less power (since you’re just confirming the facts that opposing counsel has selected), and less overall usefulness to the jury (since you aren’t saying much). In a courtroom cross-examination, there is a need to find ways to talk more so that you appear to be credible and, in some ways at least, so you function as a teacher for your jury. So, how do you do that if all opposing counsel is doing is giving you statements that are turned into questions by adding, “Wouldn’t you agree…” at the start, or, “Right?” at the end? What you need to do is mentally convert the language of those questions so they’re no longer leading questions. They may be asking you, “You never tested the product with actual consumers, did you?” but the question you want to answer is more like, “What did you do to test the product?” The broader version is better for ensuring that you aren’t just a rubber-stamp for your adversary’s selective claims, but instead get to share your side of the story.
    [Show full text]
  • Direct Examination
    Direct Examination dvocates begin the presentation of evidence by calling witnesses. The questions they ask of the witnesses they call are direct examination. A Direct examination of a witness should be the easiest part of an arbitration hearing. You have a friendly witness on the stand who generally wants to be helpful to your case. All you need do is ask the witness some simple questions and let them tell the arbitrator their story. Nothing could be easier, right? And nothing could be more perilous. Unlike cross-examination, you do not have complete control over the witness. Rather than stating facts and merely having the witness agree or disagree with those facts, as on cross, during direct it is the witness who narrates the facts. A misstatement, momentary lapse of memory or even an inappropriate emotional response and your case has suddenly become that much more difficult. Like any skill, questioning a witness is something that can be improved with practice and study. Practice not only by conducting direct examinations during your assigned arbitration hearings but also by offering to assist your fellow advocates as they prepare witnesses for arbitration. Help them conduct mock examinations of the witnesses that will testify during their assigned arbitrations. In addition, I recommend watching other advocates in action. If they’re better than you are, you’ll discover new skills or techniques you can apply to your cases. If they’re worse than you are, you’ll be reminded about mistakes that you shouldn’t repeat. Regardless of what happens, you’re almost guaranteed to learn something.
    [Show full text]
  • Music & Entertainment Auction
    Hugo Marsh Neil Thomas Forrester (Director) Shuttleworth (Director) (Director) Music & Entertainment Auction Tuesday 19th February 2019 at 10.00 Viewing: For enquiries relating to the auction Monday 18th February 2019 10:00 - 16:00 please contact: 09:00 morning of auction Otherwise by Appointment Saleroom One 81 Greenham Business Park NEWBURY RG19 6HW Telephone: 01635 580595 Christopher David Martin David Howe Fax: 0871 714 6905 Proudfoot Music & Music & Email: [email protected] Mechanical Entertainment Entertainment Music www.specialauctionservices.com As per our Terms and Conditions and with particular reference to autograph material or works, it is imperative that potential buyers or their agents have inspected pieces that interest them to ensure satisfaction with the lot prior to auction; the purchase will be made at their own risk. Special Auction Services will give indications of the provenance where stated by vendors. Subject to our normal Terms and Conditions, we cannot accept returns. ORDER OF AUCTION Music Hall & other Disc Records 1-68 Cylinder Records 69-108 Phonographs & Gramophones 109-149 Technical Apparatus 150-155 Musical Boxes 156-171 Jazz/ other 78s 172-184 Vinyl Records 185-549 Reel to Reel Tapes 550-556 CDs/ CD Box Sets 557-604 DVDs 605-612 Music Memorabilia 613-658 Music Posters 659-666 Film & Entertainment Memorabilia Including items from the Estate of John Inman 667-718 Film Posters 719-743 Musical Instruments 744-759 Hi-Fi 760-786 2 www.specialauctionservices.com MUSIC HALL & OTHER DISC RECORDS 18. Music hall and similar records, 10 inch, 67, by Geo Robey (G & T 2-2721 & 18 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Making It Work
    Summer 2010 | Volume 28 Number 2 MAKING IT WORK Assessing, adjusting, and innovating in law firm practice 4`][bVS2SO\ 2SO`4`WS\Ra I believe that Duke Law BOEBEWJTJOHTUVEFOUT*BTLFE "45'"-- %63*/(BO School — indeed the entire PVSBMVNOJUPIFMQ BOEUIFZ :BMVNOJFWFOUJO/FX:PSL GVOEFEGFMMPXTIJQT TFSWFE $JUZ BHSBEVBUFHSFFUFE Duke Law community of BTNFOUPST IFMQFEXJUI NFXBSNMZ4IFDPVMEIBSEMZ alumni, faculty, and friends NPDLJOUFSWJFXT QSPWJEFE DPOUBJOIFSFOUIVTJBTNBTTIF — has an obligation to help DPOUBDUT BOEPGGFSFETIPSU UBMLFEBCPVUIFSKPC IFSMJGF BOEMPOHUFSNPQQPSUVOJUJFT JOUIFMBX BOEIFSHSBUJUVEF our students begin their *QBSUJDVMBSMZBDLOPXMFEHFUIF UP%VLF-BX4IFTFFNFEB careers in the law. NBOZDPOUSJCVUJPOTPG"TTPDJBUF EJGGFSFOUQFSTPOGSPNUIF-XIP %FBO#SVDF&MWJO±BOEIJT KVTUBZFBSBOEBIBMGFBSMJFSIBE TUBGGJOPVS$BSFFSBOE1SPGFTTJPOBM%FWFMPQNFOU$FOUFS XIPUPPLUIFMFBEJO CFFOTPEJTDPVSBHFE IFSOBUVSBM QVUUJOHUPHFUIFSUIF#SJEHFUP1SBDUJDFQSPHSBNBOEXPSLFEUJSFMFTTMZ DBMMJOH TUPDLPGPQUJNJTNEFQMFUFECZ FNQMPZFST FODPVSBHJOHTUVEFOUT DSFBUJOHPQQPSUVOJUJFT BOENBLJOHTVSF IFSVOTVDDFTTGVMKPCTFBSDI UIBUUIFTUVEFOUT±MPOHUFSNHPBMTXFSFLFQUVQQFSNPTU*OEFFE BMMPGUIF 4IFXBTBNPOHUIFGJSTUPGPVS TUVEFOUTXIPSFDFJWFEB#SJEHFUP1SBDUJDFPGGFSUIJTZFBSXJMMCFXPSLJOHXJUIB TUVEFOUTUPQBSUJDJQBUFJOPVS TVQFSWJTPSXIPIBTDPNNJUUFEUPNFOUPSUIFNBOEIFMQUIFNJOUIFJSTFBSDIFT #SJEHFUP1SBDUJDFQSPHSBN*O GPSQFSNBOFOUFNQMPZNFOU"OEBMMXJMMXPSLJOBQPTJUJPOUIBUXJMMBEWBODFUIF UIFQSPHSBNXBTTNBMM TUVEFOU±TMPOHUFSNDBSFFSHPBMT*UJTBQSPHSBN BOEBUFBNFGGPSU PGXIJDI GPDVTJOHPOUIFOFFETPGUIFGFX XFDBOBMMCFQSPVE TUVEFOUTXIPIBEOPUTFDVSFE
    [Show full text]
  • You Can Choose to Be Happy
    You Can Choose To Be Happy: “Rise Above” Anxiety, Anger, and Depression with Research Evidence Tom G. Stevens PhD Wheeler-Sutton Publishing Co. YOU CAN CHOOSE TO BE HAPPY: “Rise Above” Anxiety, Anger, and Depression With Research Evidence Tom G. Stevens PhD Wheeler-Sutton Publishing Co. Palm Desert, California 92260 Revised (Second) Edition, 2010 First Edition, 1998; Printings, 2000, 2002. Copyright © 2010 by Tom G. Stevens PhD. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews; or except as provided by U. S. copyright law. For more information address Wheeler-Sutton Publishing Co. The cases mentioned herein are real, but key details were changed to protect identity. This book provides general information about complex issues and is not a substitute for professional help. Anyone needing help for serious problems should see a qualified professional. Printed on acid-free paper. Publisher’s Cataloging-in-Publication Data Stevens, Tom G., Ph.D. 1942- You can choose to be happy: rise above anxiety, anger, and depression./ Tom G. Stevens Ph.D. –2nd ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-0-9653377-2-4 1. Happiness. 2. Self-actualization (Psychology) I. Title. BF575.H27 S84 2010 (pbk.) 158-dc22 Library of Congress Control Number: 2009943621 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION: .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]