Tyrannicide: Forging American Law of Slavery in Revolutionary South Carolina and Massachusetts by Emily Blanck

2016 ◽  
Vol 82 (2) ◽  
pp. 406-407
Author(s):  
Christine E. Sears
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
American Law

From Apprentice to Paralegal: The Rise of the Paralegal Profession in America

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert E. Mongue
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Professional Associations ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Legal Professionals ◽  
Legal Documents ◽  
White Males ◽  
Before And After ◽  
American Law ◽  
Definition Of

AbstractIn 1980, the South Carolina Supreme Court noted, “Paralegals are routinely employed by licensed attorneys to assist in the preparation of legal documents such as deeds and mortgages.” According to the court, the activities of a paralegal were of a preparatory nature, such as legal research, investigation, or the composition of legal documents. This assessment of paralegal utilization in 1980 might well have been surprising to many readers of the court’s decision. As the delegation of legal work to non-lawyers evolved, so has the paralegal profession. The goal of this paper is to trace the transition of paralegals from a somewhat glorified – albeit very specialized – secretarial role to a professional position, emphasizing the period just before and after the creation of the ABA definition of the legal/assistant paralegal position. Legal professionals, rather than historians, provide most of historiography that is available. Historians appear to have focused on particular lawyers, especially those who became political leaders, and the efforts of persons other than white males to enter the profession with little mention of the personnel that supported those lawyers. Discussion of the historical development of paralegals and the paralegal profession has been limited to introductory chapters of practice manuals written by lawyers and paralegal educators for paralegals. The utilization of legal assistants from the 1970s to the present is well-documented, however, in contemporary writings by lawyers, law office managers, and social scientists. This paper is concerned with the development of the paralegal profession and the paralegal role in American law offices. This study examines writings from the twentieth century lawyers, paralegals, law office managers, paralegal educators, and social scientists to track the paralegal profession in five respects: (1) Definition of the nature of the role of the persons considered part of the occupation; (2) Establishment of educational requirements and forums; (3) Organization of professional associations; (4) Self-regulation; and, (5) Development of enforceable codes of professional conduct. In addition to the contemporary writings, the study uses information obtained through communications with paralegals, paralegal educators, and paralegal association directors who practiced during the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.

An Ultrastructural Comparison of Hepatocytes from ADH+ and ADH−Peromyscus Maniculatus

1996 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 30-31
Author(s):  
J. T. Ellzey ◽  
D. Borunda ◽  
B. P. Stewart
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
Adult Male ◽  
Uranyl Acetate ◽  
Model System ◽  
Deer Mice ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Genetic Stock ◽  
Hepes Buffer ◽  
Transmission Electron ◽  
Color Scanner

Genetically alcohol deficient deer mice (ADHN/ADHN) (obtained from the Peromyscus Genetic Stock Center, Univ. of South Carolina) lack hepatic cytosolic alcohol dehydrogenase. In order to determine if these deer mice would provide a model system for an ultrastructural study of the effects of ethanol on hepatocyte organelles, 75 micrographs of ADH+ adult male deer mice (n=5) were compared with 75 micrographs of ADH− adult male deer mice (n=5). A morphometric analysis of mitochondrial and peroxisomal parameters was undertaken.The livers were perfused with 0.1M HEPES buffer followed by 0.25% glutaraldehyde and 2% sucrose in 0.1M HEPES buffer (4C), removed, weighed and fixed by immersion in 2.5% glutaraldehyde in 0.1M HEPES buffer, pH 7.4, followed by a 3,3’ diaminobenzidine (DAB) incubation, postfixation with 2% OsO4, en bloc staining with 1% uranyl acetate in 0.025M maleate-NaOH buffer, dehydrated, embedded in Poly/Bed 812-BDMA epon resin, sectioned and poststained with uranyl acetate and lead citrate. Photographs were taken on a Zeiss EM-10 transmission electron microscope, scanned with a Howtek personal color scanner, analyzed with OPTIMAS 4.02 software on a Gateway2000 4DX2-66V personal computer and stored in Excel 4.0.

Use of the AMA Guides in State Workers' Compensation Systems: 2009 Update

2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 13-16
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham ◽  
Jenny Walker
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
North Carolina ◽  
South Carolina ◽  
South Dakota ◽  
Rhode Island ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Fourth Edition ◽  
Sixth Edition ◽  
Specific Guideline ◽  
Compensation Systems

Abstract The AMAGuides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) is the most widely used basis for determining impairment and is used in state workers’ compensation systems, federal systems, automobile casualty, and personal injury, as well as by the majority of state workers’ compensation jurisdictions. Two tables summarize the edition of the AMA Guides used and provide information by state. The fifth edition (2000) is the most commonly used edition: California, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, New Hampshire, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Vermont, and Washington. Eleven states use the sixth edition (2007): Alaska, Arizona, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Wyoming. Eight states still commonly make use of the fourth edition (1993): Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, South Dakota, Texas, and West Virginia. Two states use the Third Edition, Revised (1990): Colorado and Oregon. Connecticut does not stipulate which edition of the AMA Guides to use. Six states use their own state specific guidelines (Florida, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, North Carolina, and Wisconsin), and six states do not specify a specific guideline (Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, South Carolina, and Virginia). Statutes may or may not specify which edition of the AMA Guides to use. Some states use their own guidelines for specific problems and use the Guides for other issues.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document