considering convenience of witnesses, availability of a courtroom, administrative efficiency, pretrial publicity, effect of the move on pending motions, and inconvenience and cost for defendant and defense counsel in determining that district court did not abuse its discretion in ordering intradistrict transfer.
Summary of this case from U.S. v. ChitolieNo. 99-102.
October 4, 1999.
C.A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 174 F. 3d 870.
considering convenience of witnesses, availability of a courtroom, administrative efficiency, pretrial publicity, effect of the move on pending motions, and inconvenience and cost for defendant and defense counsel in determining that district court did not abuse its discretion in ordering intradistrict transfer.
Summary of this case from U.S. v. ChitolieFull title:TOPINK, ILLINOIS STATE TREASURER v. COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. ET AL
Court:U.S.
Date published: Oct 4, 1999
Porter argued "it is manifestly impossible for a defendant adequately to explain why he is not a continuing…
Morva v. CommonwealthDue to the integration of these factors into the analysis, Morva claims that Dr. Cunningham's testimony would…