MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7052672707

A statement of facts and figures showing how the Process-serving attorneys, under the guise of making services for nothing, at the expense of the attorneys themselves, to save costs to the litigant and keep down the disbursements of the suit, robbed both the sheriffs and the litigants.

2014· article· en· W7052672707 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNothingStatement (logic)HeavenPractice of lawPost office
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

motion vigorously, declaring: 1st, that if they made services they made them for nothing !!! and 2nd, that they made services to keep down the disbursements of the suit, and save costs to the litigant !!!The motion was dropped, and very shortly afterwards I was assailed through the columns of the press for having inspired the motion-which I do not deny.The first of these famous epistles appeared in the Glo'be of the (3th February, '77, over the signature U A Practicing Laivyer."He says : "Now, I know, as a lawyer, that lawyers are in the habit of serving many papers, including Writs, and they do it for two reasons : first, to expidite business, (for if ] tapers go into the Sheriffs' hands they are likely to remain there a long time;, and secondly, to decrease the disbursements of the suit.Lawyers cannot charge, and do not, for serving Writs or Subpoenas.''I discovered that this self-styled "Practicing Lawyer" was no other than an old Puritan named Charlie Durand, who, I was told, had an office in a garret in a back street or lane in the neighbourhood of the Post Office in the City of Toronto, where, in addition to his duties of a "Practicing Lawyer," he also, as he tells us, served many papers, thus combining in himself the duties of a Practicing Lawyer and a Sheriff's Bailiff, but he denies his office is in a garret, he says it is lower dow r n ; well if it is he is not as near heaven as I hoped he was, but being lower down he will be much more accessible to his clients while he is w T ith us, and nearer his home when he takes his departure.Notwithstanding all ''Practicing Lawyer's" protestations that lawyers cannot charge, and do not for serving Writs or Subpoenas, 1 tell him I hold in my hands the receipted and taxed Bill of Costs in a cause in which he was Plaintiff's Attorney, served the Writ of Summons himself, with no mileage, and charged and collected #3.50 more than his own legal fee.Had the Sheriff made the service, his fee would have been $1.80, but the "Practicing Lawyer" took &3.50, being within 10 cents of a sum equal to two Sheriffs' fees ; he pocketed $1.80 that belonged to the Sheriff, and a further sum of SI. 70 that belonged to the litigant and was wrongfully taken from him.Oh, Charlie, Charlie, repent in your lower office, and disgorge before you take your departure.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1040.056

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→