- Standard of Review
- Standard of Review Analysis
- Crazy Deal! REALLY! Yamaha REVSTAR II Standard Review
- EVH Wolfgang Standard Review
- Epiphone 60s Les Paul Standard Review – Better than the 50s Standard?
- Module I: Standard of Review
- Statutory Appeals in the Standard of Review
Standard of Review
the standard of review is the amount of,deference given by an appellate court to,various determinations made during an,earlier part of the adjudication there,are three basic review standards clearly,erroneous de novo and abuse of,discretion that grow out of three,different kinds of lower court,determinations questions of fact tend to,be reviewed on what is called a clearly,erroneous basis questions of fact are,for the jury to decide but you should,keep in mind that all bench trials that,at bench trials judges can also decide,questions of fact the Trier of fact can,assess the demeanor of witnesses and,hence has an advantage over appellate,courts in deciding factual questions,because the appellate courts only have,before them the paper record because the,Trier of fact is better placed to make,factual determinations appellate courts,will only set aside a question of fact,determination if it is clearly erroneous,thus even if the pellet judge believes,that she would have found differently as,a Trier of fact she as an appellate,judge may be forced by the clearly,erroneous standard to uphold the finding,are related but less deferential,standard of review substantial evidence,calls upon an appellate court to uphold,a jurys question a fact determination,unless the determination is not,supported by substantial evidence but if,you wake me up in the middle of the,night and ask me whats the standard or,of rate of review for questions of fact,Im going to tell you its the clearly,erroneous standard in contrast to,questions of fact lower courts also,make determinations about questions of,law at an initial trial questions of law,for the judge to decide whether the,defendant sold synthetic marijuana would,be a question of fact for the jury,whether selling spice violates a,criminal statute is a question of law,for the judge to decide in contrast to,questions of fact the lower court is,deemed to have no advantage,evidentiary or otherwise in deciding,questions of law accordingly appellate,courts gives that absolutely no,deference with regard to lower court,determinations about questions of law,questions of law are reviewed on a de,novo basis meaning that the appellate,court should decide those kinds of,question is if were deciding the issue,from scratch de novo the reason the,reasoning of the lower courts analysis,should only be deferred to to the extent,that its persuasive appellate courts as,a theoretical matter should treat the,reasoning of the trial court as though,it were an additional brief from one of,the litigants something to be considered,but not deferred to because of the stark,difference between different the,deference given to questions of law and,questions of fact its crucial for,appellate courts to be able to,distinguish between what questions fall,into which categories the problem of,categorization is made all the harder it,was made all the harder as there is also,an intermediate category of,determinations called mixed questions of,law in fact the treatment of these,intermediate questions are annoyingly,complex but if I had to summarize while,standing on one leg,Id say appellate courts give clearly,erroneous review to mixed questions when,factual issues predominate and give de,novo review when legal questions,predominate or the realist in me,suspects the courts might apply a,sliding scale of deference depending on,the extent to which factual questions or,legal questions predominate theres one,last important standard of review and,that is the abuse of discretion standard,when a judge is given the discretion to,do something such as issue an injunction,an appellate court will only overturn,that action if it determines that the,original act was an abuse of discretion,somewhat surprisingly for most of our,countrys history,there was no well worked out,jurisprudence of,constituted a question of law or a,question of fact much less what,constituted a mixed question of law in,fact but then in the 1980s the judges on,the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals,decided informally to include in each,opinion an explicit discussion of what,standard of review they were applying,with regard to each issue on appeal this,informal Circuit Court Rule had a,dramatic impact on the law suddenly,there were hundreds of cases explicitly,grappling with what was the appropriate,standard of review the West key number,system which youll learn catalogs under,different key numbers which cases,address which specific issues suddenly,saw an explosion in the number of cases,discussing the standard of review now,nearly all the circuits have adopted the,practice and appellate litigants,explicitly briefed the standard of,review issued that should be applied in,each appeal so the tool here as as,youre reading appellate decisions is to,especial and especially older decisions,is to pay attention to which standard of,review the court applied to particular,issues in the older decisions they wont,tell you which one they are applying so,youre gonna have to infer it more,specifically when you read in an opinion,you should ask did the court give,adequate deference to jury,determinations of factual questions more,generally learning the standard of,review reviews allows you better to,appreciate how our system limits and,narrows the grounds for appeal if you,have one below on a factual issue youre,in a much better position than if youve,won on a question of law and now for,discussion should appellate deference be,as great now that technology is,providing HD videos of witness demeanor,you
Standard of Review Analysis
hello again,in this video im going to talk about,the standard of review in substantive,review of administrative action,this is a topic we have already touched,upon when we looked at,privative clauses and rights of appeal,we saw that in the standard of review,and analysis,as it existed before vavilov if,parliament vested the power in an,administrative body,and protected it with a privitive clause,this was taken,as a strong indication that a reasonable,standard or before dunsmiur a patent,unreasonableness standard was,appropriate,vavalov as you also know changed this,by introducing a presumptions based,approach,the existence of a privitive clause was,rendered irrelevant to the choice of,standard of review,reasonableness is presumed to be the,appropriate standard,whether or not parliament hedged around,the power with a privitive clause,conversely we saw that the presence of a,statutory right of appeal,now gives rise to a presumption that,correctness review,is the appropriate standard,what im going to do in this video is,place these two particular issues in,their broader context,im going to talk about the broader,aspects of the standard review,analysis both before and after vavalov,in the second and third pre-recorded,lectures for this week,i will be talking about applying the,reasonableness and correctness standards,respectively until vavalov,dunsmuir was the leading case on,determining the appropriate standard of,review,and it is useful to start with what the,majority in dunsmir saw as the problem,with the state of the law as it then was,the judgment of the majority begins at,paragraph,one in pretentious terms it speaks of,the troubling questions of the approach,to be taken in judicial review of,decisions of administrative,tribunals it goes on,the recent history of judicial review in,canada,has been marked by ebbs and flows of,deference,confounding tests and new words for old,problems,but no solutions that provide real,guidance for litigants council,administrative decision makers,or judicial review judges,in response to these challenges dunsmir,sought to simplify the approach to,substantive review of administrative,action,in two ways first it reduced the number,of standards from three to two,and secondly it tried to simplify the,test for determining when each standard,would apply,i will talk about each of these in turn,but my emphasis will be on the second,how each of the two standards apply will,be considered in more detail,in the second and third video for this,week,but i need to consider the question,briefly here,remember that the actual approach to the,standard of reviewing dunswear has been,superseded by,vavalov but we need to look at dunns,mirror both to understand the position,from which the current position,developed,and also to understand the reasons why,there was an emerging consensus that the,law had to change,the short version of this story is that,the animating principle,as understood in dunsmere is deference,in reasonableness review the court will,defer to the primary decision maker,the tribunal or the administrative,agency,reasonable review as the majority put it,is a deferential standard animated by,the principle that,certain questions that come before,administrative tribunals,do not lend themselves to one specific,particular result,tribunals have a margin of appreciation,within,the range of acceptable and rational,solutions,a court conducting a review for,reasonableness inquires into the,qualities that makes a decision,reasonable,referring both to the process of,articulating reasons,and to outcomes,incorrectness review on the other hand,as the majority put it in dunsmuir,at paragraph 50.,a reviewing court will not show,deference to the decision makers,reasoning process,it will rather undertake its own,analysis of the question,that analysis will bring the court to,decide whether it agrees with the,determination of the decision maker,if not the court will substitute his own,view,and provide the correct answer from the,outset,the court must ask itself whether the,tribunals decision was correct,according to the majority in dunsmur the,following,factors indicate that deference is,appropriate,and that a reasonableness standard of,review should apply,first a primitive clause is a statutory,direction from,parliament or a provincial legislature,indicating the need for deference,second where the question is one of fact,discretion or,policy deference will usually apply,questions that can be characterized as,mixed fact and law,should also be approached through the,deferential reasonableness standard,third where the tribunal is interpreting,its own statute,our statute is closely connected to its,own statute,or where the administrative tribunal has,developed particular expertise in the,application of the law,for example in labour adjudication,on the other hand the majority in,dunsmir,indicated that correctness review would,be appropriate in the following,situations,first where a particular challenge to,administrative action,raises constitutional issues for example,in relation to,federalism as we saw in the case of,crevier,second dunsmir followed earlier case law,in talking about true questions of,jurisdiction or virus,as i discussed in the lecture on,privative clauses,the language is intended to distinguish,the more expansive approach that,predominated pre-qp,in which just about any question could,be framed as one of jurisdiction,if the judges wanted to intervene,third questions of general law continue,to attract correctness review,a question of general law is defined as,one,that is both of central importance to,the legal system as a whole,and outside the adjudicators,specialized area of expertise,finally questions that relate to,jurisdictional lines,between two or more competing,specialized tribunals,dunsmiur confirmed should be subject to,correctness review,it is important to know that the,majority in dunsmuir did not envisage a,standard of review analysis to be,necessary,in every case where existing case law,already answered the question it was not,necessary to repeat the standard of,review analysis,having taken you through the revised,approach in dunns mirror,it is appropriate to pause and ask,whether or how far the majority achieved,its objective,of simplifying the standard of review,analysis,and developing an approach that gives,greater guidance to lower courts and,others,i think what you might say is that,dunsmur was a partial success,the reduction of the number of standards,from three to two has,generally been met with approval,second since dunsmure the jurisprudence,has evolved to recognize that,reasonableness will be the applicable,standard for most categories of,questions on judicial review,including presumptively when a decision,maker interprets its enabling statute,but in terms of a simpler standard of,review analysis,that is a simpler approach to,determining which standard of review,applies in a given situation i think,this is where dunsmir perhaps fell down,i will go into this in a bit more in the,next pre-recorded lecture,but one of the dissenters in dunsmuir,justice binney was,very critical of the majority for its,attempt to finesse the standard of,review analysis,he spoke of the need to establish some,presumptive rules,and secondly to get the parties away,from arguing about the tests,and back to arguing about the,substantive merits of the case,particularly in respect of the second of,these,this is something that dunsmeer failed,to do by all accounts,this is where the story of dunsmur ends,and the story of vatilov begins,as the plurality in vavilov put it at,paragraph,seven it has become clear that,dunsmuirs,promise of simplicity and predictability,has not been fully realized,and so in vevolov the majority and i,will call them that even though it was,technically a unanimous decision on the,case at barr,the majority sought to revisit the issue,of the standard of review analysis,vavalov in the words of the majority in,paragraph,one
More: biofit review
Crazy Deal! REALLY! Yamaha REVSTAR II Standard Review
foreign,[Music],[Music],so,[Applause],[Music],[Music],[Applause],uh,[Music],[Music],oh,[Music],[Music],[Music],[Music],its,[Music],its been so long since we left,[Music],its,almost is,[Music],[Music],here we are,[Music],getting ready ready,[Music],[Music],get out of town,[Music],rocky road,[Music],[Music],hello fans of the not classic guitar of,the not tally the nut strat and the,not les paul,fans of the,double cut the way that yamaha does them,because yamaha has the new refstars out,and,i can already tell you,a the video sponsored a b thats not my,opinion thats bob thats my time and i,cannot tell you that im pretty uh,impressed by what theyre doing here,that by the way is way more yellow than,it looks there um,so we got the element series the,standard series thats this one and the,professional series thats this one,element series comes in hamburgers two,lefty models the standard series comes,in,six hamburger models,four p90 models and two lefties which,are hamburger the colors are,in the standard series in humbucker uh,black,flash green hot merlot so thats a dark,red,uh sunset burst,swift blue and vintage white and in p90,its a black merlot this one and then,the swift blue which is kind of cool,because its got a little bit of green,touch in it now when its set on the,sheet hey were sending you a guitar,uh sunburst i was like oh,boring,and then i opened the gig bag let me,show you,the standard series coming to get back,thats a big pet peeve of mine guitars,in a certain price range i dont know,how much this is i will tell you later,when i know,um coming without a gig bag and this,isnt just an alibi gig bag this is,actually,its got nicely padded,uh shoulder straps,its a little bit more sturdy,nicely padded,it might not be the you know the,ultimate kickback that you want for the,guitar but it is solid it is a solid,piece of equipment that comes with the,guitar well done,yamaha the element has dots,the other two series have these really,cool lines which i dig,elements and standard both made in,indonesia,and the differences,tough to say other than you know the,obvious lines,um,oh thats what i was i opened the,kickback and this came out and i am,impressed,there are some fades that go like this,but the burst sunburst to go from bottom,to top i think it is utterly stunning,beautifully done yamaha,and,i just i just love it its unique and,its a its a nice touch on the sunburst,i love it on the p90s weve got these,freaky dekey,bridge piece which i think really sets,it apart on the humbuckers weve got a,stop tail like on the others over there,um,other than that many things are the same,the element series doesnt have binding,the other two series do,we have a beautiful volute right here,just how its supposed to be non-locking,tuners which is something i should,about they are very very good theyre,very,soft very smooth i wish all of them had,locking tuners i didnt about that,in the uh,element series theres really no reason,why they dont have locking tuners other,than,lets save a couple bucks and it really,is only a few bucks in production um so,yamaha please next time around make,these locking it just a modern guitar,should have it theres no reason why it,doesnt,theres no excuse you can make that im,going to accept,weight on the headstock no,really no differences i will notice,super high gloss polyurethane,is it correct let me let me not say,wrong things here,yes,but then a satin neck which feels really,like wood so dont think this is a uh,painted neck it it has a wooden feeling,um beautiful transition here from neck,to body,cool shaped cavity cover,p90s or that still have these stickies,on them lets take the stickies off,im usually not the biggest fan of the,p90s in in in the cream but it just it,all works,interestingly we have a five position,switch,were going to find out what happens,there later and then,theres a focus switch what happens,there,i dont know ill find out this is a,vp5n p90 type signal called el niko 5,and thats a vp5b so probably yamaha,exclusive oem their own thing,we have,a maple top it says here,really whether thats veneer or not i,dont know,chambered mahogany so they have a new,type of chambering system which isnt,just for weight relief,it is also,scientifically developed to actually,improve the resonance of the guitar,whether or not that is snake oil and oh,my god we have this amazing chambering,and look how great the guitar is or not,you have to decide when you play one i,know they do sound good i know they do,resonate i know they have great sustain,whether thats because of the chambering,i dont know mahogany body mahogany neck,rosewood fretboard 12 inch,thingy stainless steel jumbo frets 22 of,them,high strength pps nut,tunomatic,bridge right there and then the,racing tailpiece diecast tuners three,ply pickard comes with elixir,nanoweb lights 10 to 46 and the kickback,lets read up on,what the crap this focus switch is,it shifts the resonance the resonant,peaks of the guitars tone and increases,power,evoking overwound pickups,try it for the road of jazz tone or,aggressive push in front of the amp okay,well find out,and then,they have when you go in the in between,positions its kind of like a hollow,outer face sound but its not done out,of phase its actually created by well i,mean theyre saying,its done with delaying,the other pickup well when you have to,pick two sounds and youre delaying one,of them what happens it goes out of,phase so it isnt a 180 degree outer,face,its a,differently out of phase so in the end,its still an out of phase sound but it,does sound differently out of phase so,interesting approach yamaha very,interesting,um oh what i forgot to say,they are the professional standard,models they have carbon reinforced necks,and even carbon reinforced bars,somewhere in the body,these are not your old style boring,guitars they definitely,pushed,the idea of what can we make out of,out of our guitars does that make him,better in mind blowing the modern new,instruments no its its wooden strings,and pickups but they didnt just go the,old ways here we go sounds into the,chong king sky king with the 412 cream,but loaded cap through the ox,[Music],[Music],thats horrible,[Music],[Music],and here weve got one of those in phase,things,[Applause],super honky and clearly differently out,of phase,[Music],[Applause],[Music],[Music],mmm,[Music],[Applause],theres so much spanking to it with,these p90s this is a really cool guitar,that sounds only like a red star with,p90 scan i think,[Music],that honkiness,delayed pickups interesting,do,lets pull this thing,so,[Music],definitely rolled off in a way lets,look at it here,[Music],its very relevant i can hear the road,of jazz tony thing,[Music],do,[Music],be,[Music],different than just rolling it back very,interesting see how that works with some,gain,lets go to,like a slightly boosted overdrive sound,[Music],oh,[Music],so,bye,[Music],uh,[Music],[Applause],rather impressive theres quite a bit of,total variety there like that dullness,with that focus switch really for leads,especially with the in between position,shifty thing,not too shabby lets go into the red,seven,duality 100,i mean with the p90 theres massive,clarity happening all the way through,lets pull that switch,now its really honky and focal and this,theres a lot of different sounds in,here,lets go into high gain territory with,the soldano slo-100,[Music],[Music],classic rock sounds with the mvp 66 from,morgan thats a classic jtm circuit if,ive ever played one and,its probably made for these types of,pickups for this guitar,[Applause],[Applause],then,damn the definition its all freaking,there and its,clear without getting in the way in the,low end,thats a combination that lets you,freaking rock,im moving on into the marshall,thats wrong,sv 28,little plexi head there,[Music],so,[Music],[Applause],morgan its ac20 which is very voxish,[Music],[Applause],[Music],hmm,[Music],that works extremely well going into the,marshall,jcm 800.,[Music],um,[M
More: murderville review
EVH Wolfgang Standard Review
okay its time to,talk about this wolfgang standard,ive been looking at these for um man a,couple of years but,due to a lot of uh supply chain issues,during covet it was really hard to get,one i was watching them and watching,them and,had my eye on a special,for a while but i ended up going with,this standard a little while ago so glad,i did if youre thinking about buying,this,uh dont hesitate,just get one all right so lets have a,look at some of the specs on this guitar,there are three basic ranges you have,the standard,the special and then the usa model okay,first of all,i was absolutely blown away by the,quality of this guitar,but lets look at the specs,usa right now 6.99 i think this is the,best guitar that you can buy for that,price,burn on especially in this type of,guitar that has a floyd rose and um,its made for made for speed,um so the features are baked maple neck,and fingerboard,um thats on um,a lot of the models have the baked maple,neck and fingerboard adds more stability,um and i can verify that this guitar has,been,through some,really hot weather recently and then,back down to kind of normal temperatures,and i picked it up,it was perfectly in tune,the neck hasnt moved since i had it,which is great,has a 12 to 16 compound radius which i,would have on every guitar if i could uh,the compound radius i mean,um,that makes it a lot easier to play,going from the lower register all the,way up here it flattens out so,it makes your bends,a lot easier and sound better and they,dont choke out,now this is,a,pretty crazy direct mount evh wolfgang,pickups these pickups,are the same pickups in all models now,some people say well the usa ones are,better,um ive looked at some comparisons,online i dont know all i know is that,these,are amazing,the overtones and,sustain out of these pickups,blew my mind,thats the fact,so,uh,i think the difference is this guitar is,made in indonesia so,according to what ive can find out,online they use the same materials,theyre just uh,manufactured in indonesia and the same,materials manufactured in the u.s if you,if you know of anything any different,please comment below but i do know that,these pickups,are lacking nothing,and i have a lot of guitars i have a lot,of different guitars a lot of seymour,duncan pickups and these can stack up to,any of them,um,[Music],theyre different theyre a different,pickup though they are theyre different,than my other guitars,its eq wise compression wise they they,react differently,um,they really excel on the distorted tones,clean tones are good but the distorted,tones with the sustain and,like the overtones on the cords,so if you if you happen to hold a cord,[Applause],[Music],[Applause],[Music],[Applause],theres just ton of overtones and,sustains,[Music],so thats not a heavily distorted tone,its kind of a kind of fairly distorted,but i did find i gigged this guitar and,i do find that,when you have volume coming back through,your speakers it really reacts well,depending on where youre standing just,very reactive i think the direct mount,has something to do with it but i also,think that the design of the pickup,itself,thanks to,uh eddie van halen um i think thats,what makes this guitar,so good,even at the standard range here i mean,even the standard i know its its,fairly inexpensive but it,doesnt feel like that,i think the design of this guitar,just works,okay so next,its,it has a evh branded floyd rose and this,is where a lot of people get hung up on,this one the special its a lower end,special lower end floyd,uh,bridge,branded now i havent had any issues,with this the cool thing about this,guitar compared to some of my other ones,is that its,its it needs to be set,so that its level to the body,back here so it and you do have to do,some adjustment on,the springs to to make sure that the,springs are,in enough to keep that bridge,on the body so when you bend,the bridge doesnt move,it just stays in place now i have a lot,of guitars that can float that pull up,and down,but i used this one on a gig recently,and i really prefer,um im really getting used to not having,to pull up,but i do have guitars for that when i,want to but this one being flat on the,body its its really really solid,extremely solid it,holds the tuning much better,when you bend the other strings dont go,out of tune and i think it contributes,to,the sustain of the guitar and the tone,of the guitar i think its its all part,of eddies design,having that the bridge,flush to the body direct mount pickups,tone galore like a les paul its got,this thick tone,um but then youve got you got a really,nice whammy bar i havent had any issues,ive seen some people,upgrade the saddles and upgrade a couple,of little parts on it and some people,upgraded the bridge,im not going to do that unless i really,feel like i got to it works perfect for,me,it has a zinc alloy sustain block i know,the specials,have a brass i think have a brass so,theres some some different specs in the,special,uh special has a carve top this is a,flat top,uh i havent played a special so,um,all i know is this one and im extremely,happy with this one,uh so,pickup,switching,is interesting too,typical,les paul stall switch toggle but when,you go to the middle position in between,you dont get a split you get,uh you get two pickups both pickups on,which is really cool a really cool sound,so if you go from you know,and then you go to your neck,[Music],then you go to the middle,[Music],it really has a different tone its not,that split coil,um like you would get in a les paul so i,really like it,um what else we got we got uh its gold,sparkle of course this one is a newer,color they come in a bunch of colors,uh so lets go have a look at the colors,so i mean you can get,white,of course like a black,gold,i love the army drab green then we got a,um whats this one called this is like a,kind of a gray,and you get a silver sparkle and a red,so uh some of the specks,see if we missed anything um,the volume has a treble bleed,so electronics if theres anything that,feels maybe a tiny bit,not up to spec as like to an american,maybe the feel of this knob i mean im,im really reaching for something here,because the knobs been working perfect,for me,maybe it feels like that on all of them,maybe its just me i dont know,but um,some people you know talk about the,electronics i havent had any issues,that sounds great now if i took these,electronics out and put,you know higher end pots in,maybe it would make a difference,but it comes with a treble bleed circuit,so if you when you pull your volume back,it uh it doesnt get muddy you know it,gets,still a usable tone so if you go,if you go back,you go back say,pull it back,still keeps the high end for you,[Music],which makes a really usable tone at low,volumes,[Music],what else we got i think thats most of,it it has the contoured heel,on the back easy to reach the high frets,22 frets,um,i think the i think i covered most of it,um,i loved it,loved the color the baked maple neck,i mean you cant go wrong so lets get,to some tones,okay lets get into some cool tones with,this guitar,first of all let me just say if youre,thinking about getting one just go and,do it its,it blew my mind it really exceeded what,i thought how good i thought it was,going to be,it and the neck is amazing the neck is,so smooth the smoothest neck ive ever,played,um,and,uh the radius is really really great for,me because my hands are not huge theyre,pretty small hands,um and i find a lot of guitars are a,little bit too wide this way i mean i,can play them but this one just makes it,even easier to play because its not too,uh not too wide the fretboard is not,wide its really comfortable,[Music],me,[Applause],[Applause],[Music],heres a little bit of clean tone,[Music],[Applause],[Music],[Applause],[Music],[Applause],[Music],[Music],[Laughter],[Music],[Music],do,[Music],[Applause],[Music],[Applause],i should mention im using the uh helix,for all my tones,um,it has so much variety of tones um
Epiphone 60s Les Paul Standard Review – Better than the 50s Standard?
in todays video were checking out this,epiphone les paul,60 standard this is the inspired by,gibson range,and this color is known as iced tea it,also comes in two other colors,[Music],hey,[Music],[Music],[Music],uh,[Music],oh,[Music],[Music],hey,[Music],[Music],um,[Music],welcome back folks this is shane youre,listening to this beautiful epiphone,60s standard lets take a look heres,the guitar up close like all les pauls,from gibson and epiphones the mahogany,body and mahogany neck,we get 22 medium jumbo frets at 12 inch,fretboard radius,we get the graftec nut as well on the,top and on the back we also get the,grover tuners which is fantastic,one of the things i know will appeal to,a lot of players is this slim taper neck,the 60s necks arent as fat as the 50s,one here if you missed that video ill,link it up in the card somewhere over,here,but yeah the neck isnt quite as fat on,this guitar odds are that will appeal to,more people,in terms of the pickup configuration we,get the pro bucker humbucker pickups,theyre going for that classic path,sound and they say on their website that,its closer than you think,now i love the bridge pickup on this,guitar it sounds great the neck pickup,is a little bit woolly,but im going to explain a little bit,more about that and how you can get the,cleanest tone out of it possible coming,up at the end of the video,the fretboard material is indian laurel,and i have to tell you up close,this might be one of the best looking,guitar necks ive ever seen,some people might say it looks a little,dry thanks to the lighting and all that,kind of stuff but it doesnt it looks,absolutely stunning,as you can see looking at the fretboard,the indian laurel looks amazing,because this is a standard 60s we get a,regular tuna matic bridge as well we,dont get one of those wrap around,tailpieces on this particular model,so yeah if thats your thing youll,definitely get a kick out of this,firstly a massive thank you to sky music,here in melbourne australia for letting,me borrow this i really appreciate it,links to them will be below,if you also live overseas ill put some,tomen and sweetwater links down there,they help support the channel at no,extra cost to you,i dont charge to make these videos or,anything like that if you use those,links,thank you so much so im going to give,you my thoughts about this guitar at the,end were going to try it clean and,dirty and all that kind of stuff and if,its helpful please give the video a,thumbs up,and uh yeah theres some good things to,love about this and a few things i think,im going to mention,about it at the end so lets get into it,all right lets kick it off today,unplugged into the marshall dsl 40cr,amplifier were going to start on the,clean channel,and then go over to the crunch and ultra,gain as well this is neck pickup on,clean with the volume and tone all the,way up,[Laughter],beautiful over to both lets give this a,shot neck down just a hair,[Music],and now with neck all the way up,so that brings the base back into it,[Music],and over the bridge,[Music],its quite a bright bridge pickup lets,try it with the tone control on which is,something i hardly ever do,[Music],and all the way back up,[Music],and now over to the crunch channel on,the amplifier well just start on bridge,pickup with the volume all the way up,here we go,[Music],so i had to re-eq my amp for the drive,channel i added more tops and backed off,the base and it made the neck pick up,way more sort of snappy in terms of its,tone i really dig that,lets have a listen,[Music],over to both pickups,[Music],yeah off camera i had to re-cue the,amplifier it still sounds a little bit,woolly on the neck pickup in combination,like in this second position with both,pickups but,if we turn the neck down lets have a,listen,[Music],yeah i dig that all right over to neck,pickup now but with the volume control,most of the way off so lets see if it,cleans up,[Music],over the bridge for the same thing,volume most of the way down,[Music],bridge pickup sounds better to my ear,than the neck does in pretty much every,situation volume up on bridge,[Music],volume up on nick,[Music],yeah its an interesting guitar tonally,its sort of like neck pickup on its own,with the volume control up sounds great,bridge pickup sounds great no matter,what you do and both pickups,its okay but as long as you keep the,neck pickup down in the mix,of both then youre going to get some,good tones out of it but,yeah maybe not quite as good as the 50s,one overall in my opinion,thanks for watching folks my names,shane a huge thanks to sky music again,for letting me borrow this i really,appreciate it if you want to find out,about this,links will be down in the description,below through to sky music and also,overseas if you live in europe or in the,us,now in terms of what i think of this,its a beautiful guitar it plays great,i think it requires a high pass filter,in the neck position it doesnt sound at,all like its got one especially when,you turn down,it gets a little bit too muddy for me,but thats a five dollar mod,definitely worth doing otherwise its,great i think,the way that it feels its balanced well,it looks like a quality instrument its,absolutely beautiful,theres no blemishes or anything on the,finish and i dont know what else to say,other than,i didnt really like the neck pickup as,much as i did this 50s one,behind me oh its on this side over here,this one,sounds a little bit better and in my,hand feels a little bit better so,if youre looking for something with a,fatter neck i would go for the 50s one,if you want something with a slightly,slimmer neck uh and maybe a more,sort of modern humbucker tone then go,for this one but i really feel like this,was a much more playable guitar,just straight out of the box now thats,not to say that this 60s one is a bad,instrument because it absolutely isnt,i just think it could use a high pass,filter in the neck im not going to,fanboy out about any of these guitars if,theres some stuff about them i dont,like i always mentioned it in the video,thats my only criticism high pass,filter in the neck position or in both,pickups thats it,youll have a great guitar and it will,hold its own with,much much more expensive guitars so,overall i think epiphone are making some,really great instruments ive said it,before the,you know you can get very very close to,a gibson without really spending that,sort of money,and in terms of all the sort of clone,guitars,this is a league above all of them its,above the harley bensons and artist,guitars but you are paying a far more,premium price for this,over the artist guitar id probably put,the artist guitar,just under this in terms of feel and all,that kind of stuff and tone,but yeah if you want that gibson,headstock and,gibson kind of brand here it is links,will be below thanks again for watching,dont forget to subscribe,catch you soon see ya
Module I: Standard of Review
module I the standard of review every,issue is viewed through a precisely,defined lens the standard of review well,the district or trial court focuses,directly on the parties and the merits,of their dispute and appellate courts,immediate focus is on the district court,the appellate court views the trial,courts decisions and ask the question,common to all appeals under the,applicable standard of review did the,trial court commit an error that,warrants reversal because not all errors,are created equal there are a variety of,standards of review each appropriate for,a different set of alleged errors ask,yourself how is the court going to,evaluate your issue is it a clearly,erroneous standard does it fall under,abuse of discretion depending on the,alleged error the appellate court will,apply a different standard of review and,the standard used will change the amount,of deference the district court will be,given think of different standards as,different hurdles youll have to plan,accordingly and frame your issue in,light of the standard that will be used,ask yourself what hurdle where you have,to overcome now lets look at some of,the most common standards of review keep,in mind that these are not the only,possible standards just some of those,most often encountered many trial,matters such as the admission or,exclusion of evidence or the evaluation,of an experts competency to testify our,left to the trial courts discretion,therefore when the appellate courts,review these matters they use an abuse,of discretion standard and will reverse,the decision only if the appellant,establishes that the trial court abused,its discretion the appellate court,generally gives great deference to the,district court because in most cases the,district court judge is in the best,position to determine the questions of,fact when challenging a decision that is,within the trial courts discretion keep,in mind that the standard of review when,devising your plan of attack arguments,critical of the district courts,discretionary decision arent going to,work unless you can actually show that,the court abused its discretion,abuse of discretion must be i popping,neck-snapping,jaw-dropping egregious error says Roger,Bo Decker the clearly erroneous standard,applies to factual findings because the,fact-finder observed the introduction of,evidence firsthand and had the best,opportunity to judge the witnesss,credibility the appellate court will,reverse factual findings only if it,finds that there was no reasonable,evidence in the record supporting them,this means that to obtain reversal you,have to do more than simply point to the,evidence supporting your position you,have to demonstrate in absence of,evidence supporting the trial courts,finding this is not easy to do according,to the case Fisher V ro to be clearly,erroneous a decision must strike us as,more than may be or possibly wrong it,must strike us as wrong with the force,of a 5 week old unrefrigerated dead fish,taking clearly erroneous one step,further is the idea of substantial,evidence,basically if factual findings are,supported by substantial evidence then,they cannot be clearly erroneous if that,is the case you should probably,reconsider raising that particular issue,is there another plan of attack that,will get you away from trying to raise,the issue in such a way that it would be,viewed under the substantial evidence,standard only in cases involving a de,novo standard of review is the appellate,court answering essentially the same,question posed to the district court,when reviewing an issue de novo the,appellate court will consider the issue,for itself giving no deference to the,district courts decision this standard,is generally reserved for pure questions,of law such as whether the district,court applied the correct legal standard,for whether the statute that the,plaintiff has invoked applies to the,plaintiffs situation when challenging a,purely legal issue on appeal you need to,demonstrate that your interpretation of,the law is correct as compared to other,standards of review the de novo standard,has the least impact on the case on,appeal and,is the most favorable to appellant as I,mentioned earlier these four are only a,sampling of the common standards of,review other standards do exist,remember the plain error standard that,was discussed back in module B when we,were talking initial thoughts about,Appeals that is another one and that one,proton provides a particularly high,hurdle as a practical note check the,website of the jurisdiction that youre,appealing in many courts will actually,post their common standards of review,and the applicant case law theyd like,you to quote once you determine what the,standard is then you need to consider,the issue in light of its standard,review cases cited on the issue in the,district court pleadings dig up those,authorities that you know from similar,cases with the appellate court reverse,this judgment because of legal error was,the application of the lot of these,facts wrong if the trial judge has made,a mistake was it a crucial mistake,be sure to frame all the issues in your,brief accordingly
Statutory Appeals in the Standard of Review
hello again,in the last video i looked at the role,of privative clauses in relation to,determining the standard of review,and after quite a long journey we,arrived at the conclusion that for good,or ill,as a result of the new,presumptions-based approach in vavilov,privative clauses now have little,relevance in assessment saying the,standard of review to be applied,the situation is quite the reverse in,the case of statutory rights of appeal,while these were formerly important in,determining the procedural route in,making a complaint of administrative,injustice,their relevance in terms of whether a,correctness or reasonable standard,applied was not all that clear,as with the last lecture i will go into,the development of the modern law albeit,a little more briefly,but let me first say that the position,that the supreme court of canada has now,come to,is that where a statute provides a right,of appeal a correctness standard applies,so whereas the continuing,relevance of privative clauses is now,doubtful,the existence of a statutory right of,appeal is now of enormous significance,as with my mini lecture on privative,clauses lets start with an example,which can be seen in ontarios health,protection and promotion act section 46.,any party to the proceedings before the,health services appeal and review board,under this act,may appeal from its decision or order to,the divisional court in accordance with,the rules of the court,an appeal under the section may be made,on questions of law or fact are both and,the court may confirm alter or rescind,the decision of the board and may,exercise all the powers of the board to,confirm alter or rescind the order as,the court considers proper,or the court may refer the matter back,to the board for re-hearing in whole or,in part in accordance with such,directions as the court considers proper,as you can see from subsection 5 the,right of appeal is in this case very,broad,but rights of appeal can be broad or,narrow depending on the wording of the,statute in question,now what is the effect of a right of,appeal on the question of the standard,of revere,you might have thought it obvious that,the existence of a right of appeal would,mean that a correctness standard would,apply,at least as far as questions of law were,concerned,that is after all the case in ordinary,civil and criminal appeals,this is in fact a position now as a,result of vavalov,and indeed people once thought that this,was the case before,however there are a couple of decisions,of the supreme court of canada that,called this assumption into question,the first was a decision in belle canada,versus canada canadian radio television,and telecommunications commission from,1989.,in that case justice gomphiae giving the,judgment of the court said that even,in the case of statutory appeals the,principle of specialization of duties,justifies curial deference on issues,which fall squarely within its area of,expertise,this was confirmed in law society of new,brunswick versus ryan in which justice,jacobucci said at paragraph 29,the specialization of duties intended by,the legislature may warrant deference,notwithstanding the absence of a,privitive clause,the scope of deference might even have,been said to have been broadened beyond,the specific factor of specialization as,a result of dunsmir,in which the majority said that on the,question of interpretation of their home,statute an agency is usually entitled to,deference and hence for the,reasonableness standard to apply,perhaps the most we could say with,confidence is that the existence of a,right of appeal was only one factor to,be weighed in the standard of review,analysis,and not to be weighed very heavily at,that,this all changed with vavilov,as you now know vavalov held that there,is a presumption that the standard of,review is reasonableness,what is important for now is that the,existence of a right of appeal is,sufficient to rebut that presumption,i will go into that but first i would,like you to pause the video and read,paragraph 17 and 38 to 52 to vavalov,now that you have read paragraphs,38-52 of vevulov you should be aware of,the following,first where a statute provides a right,of appeal,then in hearing any appeal on grounds of,law the reviewing court will apply a,correctness standard,and second the justification for the,supreme court of canadas position is,that the inclusion of an appeal,mechanism represents a direction of the,legislature to engage in a more exacting,form of scrutiny,but this position did not escape the,criticism of the dissenters in vavilov,i am calling them dissenters even though,they agreed with the ruling they,fundamentally disagreed with the,justifications,the minority wanted to see the concept,of deference continue to do the work in,determining the standard of review,the problem with allowing the mere,existence of a right of appeal to rebut,the presumption of correctness,was that as the minority argued rights,of appeal reflect different choices by,different legislatures to permit review,for different reasons,on issues of fact law mixed facts and,law and discretion amongst others,you can see their position laid out by,going to paragraph 45 to 53 i recommend,that you do that now,i dont know about you but i found this,quite a devastating critique,but to conclude in vatilov the supreme,court of canada laid out a bold new,position with respect to the role of,statutory rights of appeal,their approach was much less nuanced,than the previous approach,but as the majority saw it the nuance,was very much part of the problem,because it confused lower courts and it,was difficult to apply,so far i have only looked at what a,right of appeal and in my previous video,a privitive clause signifies in terms of,which test a reviewing court will apply,correctness or reasonableness,i am conscious that i have not yet,talked about what these tests involve,beyond saying that in the latter the,review in court is expected to defer to,the primary decision maker,all of that is coming,in fact part of the courts objective in,its decision in vavilov was to give,explicit guidance to reviewing courts in,applying the different tests and we will,go into that in due course,so well talk about these things later,but for now goodbye