• Basics of Federal Tax Litigation

    http://klasing-associates.com/ Call Los Angeles and Orange County Tax Attorney David Klasing at 800-681-1295. Where an unacceptable tax assessment is assessed during an audit (Frequently based on incorrect facts or incorrect law) Litigation may become necessary File a tax court petition 1st chance to reach settlement – appeals Hazards of litigation Appeals officer perceives 50% chance of prevailing in court – may compromise away 50% of the proposed assessment. CPAs, E.A.s and CTEC certified tax professionals can not appear in tax court or attempt to settle a case with Chief Counsels Office. (Attorney Advantage) Most Attorneys are not also CPAs (1% of Attorneys are also CPAs) Personnel Advantage Attorneys are the only professionals (or CPA’s that have passed the tax court examinat...

    published: 22 Jan 2016
  • #UnitedStates v.s ##HolyLandFoundation Litigation #JihadInAmerica

    The Holy Land Foundation was the largest Islamic charity in the United States. Headquartered in Richardson, Texas, it was originally known as Occupied Land Fund. In December 2001, the U.S. government designated HLF a terrorist organization, seized its assets, and closed the organization. In 2004, a federal grand jury in Dallas, Texas charged HLF and five former officers and employees with providing material support to Hamas and related offenses. The prosecution's theory was that HLF distributed charity through local zakat (charity) committees located in the West Bank; that Hamas controlled those zakat committees; and that by distributing charity through Hamas-controlled committees, HLF helped Hamas win the "hearts and minds" of the Palestinian people. The first trial, in 2007, ended in th...

    published: 23 Jun 2016
  • The Emerging World of Third-Party Litigation Financing in the United States

    John Beisner, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, discusses the paper "Selling Lawsuits, Buying Trouble: The Emerging World of Third-Party Litigation Financing in the United States," which was released at the 10th Annual Legal Reform Summit on October 28, 2009. This paper begins with an overview of third-party litigation financing. It next examines current third-party financing practices in the United States. It then sets forth a critique of the practice, particularly the incentives it creates to engage in frivolous and abusive litigation. In this section, the paper also presents a case study on the Commonwealth of Australia, the first jurisdiction to permit third-party litigation funding, where such funding has dramatically increased litigation and given investors pe...

    published: 11 Apr 2011
  • United States v. Microsoft: Deposition by Bill Gates, part 1.

    United States v. Microsoft was a court case filed against Microsoft by the United States Department of Justice. The plaintiffs alleged that Microsoft abused monopoly power in its handling of operating system sales and web browser sales. The issue central to the case was whether Microsoft was allowed to bundle its flagship Internet Explorer (IE) web browser software with its Windows operating system. Microsoft stated that the merging of Windows and Internet Explorer was the result of innovation and competition, and that the two were now the same product and were inextricably linked together and that consumers were now getting all the benefits of IE for free.

    published: 03 May 2012
  • US District Court of RI Litigation Academy HD

    The “Litigation Academy” is a program of the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island in partnership with Roger Williams University Law School and the Rhode Island Chapter of the Federal Bar Association that was created to provide a low-cost, high-quality forum for teaching practitioners of all experience levels the skills needed to successfully litigate cases. You are welcome to watch a short video of the program that was created by Carlos Andres Toro of Steer Digital Media.

    published: 02 Sep 2016
  • Frank Easterbrook, "The Supreme Court of the United States and Business Litigation"

    published: 20 Feb 2015
  • Litigation Attorney, What Constitutes Someone Being Called A United States Natural Born Citizen

    See also https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/category/natural-born-citizen/ I use the ff. to guide Founding Fathers Intent: "To be a United States Natural Born Citizen, he (or she) must be one of sole nationality, so that were he (or she) ever stripped of citizenship in the United States, he (or she) would be declared as “Stateless. " "...the term ‘natural born citizen’ is used and excludes all persons owing allegiance by birth to foreign states.” The New Englander and Yale Law Review, Volume 3 (1845), p. 414 In 1833, in U.S. Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story's Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. § 1473 “ It is indispensible too, that the president should be a natural born citizen of the United States... to exclude foreign influence from their executive coun...

    published: 12 Feb 2016
  • Transnational Litigation in United States Courts Concepts and Insights

    published: 08 Apr 2017
  • E. Duncan Getchell, Jr. - Healthcare Litigation: U.S. States v. U.S. Government

    America's health care future lies in the balance, and Virginia's Solicitor General E. Duncan Getchell, Jr., is one of the key figures in the legislative battle surrounding "Obamacare." The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is the subject of numerous lawsuits; Getchell was instrumental in the Commonwealth of VA v. Sebelius case, where the State of Virginia claimed the new health care bill infringed on states' rights. Getchell speaks of the current litigation between the 28 states, including Virginia, and the U.S. Government.

    published: 27 Mar 2012
  • International Law and Litigation in the United States American Casebook Series

    published: 06 Apr 2017
  • United States of Monsanto: GMO giant is now litigation proof

    After President Obama signed the Agriculture Appropriations Bill into law on Tuesday, hundreds of thousands of people have voiced their opposition to H.R. 933. A provision in the law known as the "Monsanto Protection Act" protects the biotech industry from being sued in a court of law. The Farmer Assurance provision takes the Federal Court's right to halt the sale and use of genetically modified seed crops regardless of health risks. Jeffrey M. Smith, author of Seeds of Deception, joins us to discuss. Find RT America in your area: http://rt.com/where-to-watch/ Or watch us online: http://rt.com/on-air/rt-america-air/ Like us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/RTAmerica Follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/RT_America

    published: 29 Mar 2013
  • International Law and Litigation in the United States 2008 Documents Supplement American Casebook Se

    published: 06 Apr 2017
  • United States Body Shop Litigation (CNN Report)

    United States Body Shop Litigation (CNN Report)

    published: 17 Aug 2015
  • UVA Law's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Preps for Henderson v. U.S.

    Professor Daniel Ortiz, director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic at the University of Virginia School of Law, explains the clinic's work and its latest case, Henderson v. United States, which he will argue Feb. 24. Ortiz is the Michael J. and Jane R. Horvitz Distinguished Professor of Law.

    published: 20 Feb 2015
  • Susan Chana Lask's Strip Search Petition for Cert to the US Supreme Court

    New York Attorney Susan Chana Lask speaks with her team at the Stanford Law School Supreme Court Litigation Clinic about her Strip Search Class Action Petition for Writ of Cert to the United States Supreme Court and being a litigator. With Ms. Lask, and as part of her team, is United States Supreme Court specialist Thomas Goldstein of Goldstein, Howell & Russell.

    published: 04 Mar 2011
  • Structure of the Court System: Crash Course Government and Politics #19

    This week Craig Benzine is going to talk about the structure of the U.S. court system and how exactly it manages to keep things moving smoothly. We’’ll talk about trial courts, district courts, appeals courts, circuit courts, state supreme courts, and of course the one at the top - the U.S. Supreme Court. It’s all quite a bit to manage with jurisdictions and such, but it's important to remember that the vast majority of cases never even make it to court! Most are settled out of court, but also terms like mootness and ripeness are used to throw cases out altogether. Today, we're going to focus on how cases make it to the top, and next week we’ll talk about what happens when they get there. Produced in collaboration with PBS Digital Studios: http://youtube.com/pbsdigitalstudios Support is...

    published: 05 Jun 2015
Basics of Federal Tax Litigation

Basics of Federal Tax Litigation

  • Order:
  • Duration: 25:38
  • Updated: 22 Jan 2016
  • views: 4562
videos
http://klasing-associates.com/ Call Los Angeles and Orange County Tax Attorney David Klasing at 800-681-1295. Where an unacceptable tax assessment is assessed during an audit (Frequently based on incorrect facts or incorrect law) Litigation may become necessary File a tax court petition 1st chance to reach settlement – appeals Hazards of litigation Appeals officer perceives 50% chance of prevailing in court – may compromise away 50% of the proposed assessment. CPAs, E.A.s and CTEC certified tax professionals can not appear in tax court or attempt to settle a case with Chief Counsels Office. (Attorney Advantage) Most Attorneys are not also CPAs (1% of Attorneys are also CPAs) Personnel Advantage Attorneys are the only professionals (or CPA’s that have passed the tax court examination – 2% pass rate) that can settle a case without actual litigation in tax court No requirement to prepay a disputed tax deficiency prior to filing suit in tax court, So the most common type of tax lawsuit is a deficiency action. To bring a deficiency suit the taxpayer must have received a notice of deficiency. (90 day letter) Requirement to file a tax court petition within 90 days Unauthorized practice of law to file petition if not an attorney CPAs E.A.s known to file petition – Pro Se Loss of appeal rights for any cause of action not stated on petition Interest will continue to accrue and thus taxpayer’s should consider posting a bond for the amount disputed The Tax Court’s jurisdiction turns on the IRS’s issuing a notice of a deficiency and the timely filing of a petition by the taxpayer with the Tax Court. An IRS notice of deficiency, or “90 day letter”, Don’t file Petition within 90 days becomes automatically legally enforceable, Liens / Levys If the deficiency notice is mailed to a taxpayer who is outside of the United States then the petition must be filed within 150 days of the date the notice is mailed to the taxpayer. The deficiency notice typically states that the taxpayer owes additional taxes, penalties and interest and includes a description of the legal basis for the additional amounts sought and is typically sent at the conclusion of an audit. The IRS is required to include in the deficiency notice the last day on which the taxpayer can file a petition in the Tax Court. The federal courts will find a deficiency notice to be valid if The IRS sends it to the taxpayer’s last known address by certified or registered mail, even if the taxpayer never physically receives the notice. A taxpayer’s last known address is the address which appears on the taxpayer’s most recent federal tax return, unless the IRS is given clear and concise notification of a different address. Notice supplied with the post office of a change of address is usually found insufficient for this purpose The taxpayer may represent himself, referred to as pro se, or he may be represented by a person admitted to practice before the Tax Court. 70% Loss rate The IRS is represented in the Tax Court by the Chief Counsel for the IRS or his delegate (Said simply – the IRS is represented by IRS attorneys). The Tax Court petition must be filed with the Clerk of the Tax Court in Washington, D.C. A taxpayer is not legally entitled to a jury trial in the Tax Court. Should be sent via United States Postal Service registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or by another Tax Court approved delivery service. The date of mailing, as evidenced by a United States postmark or acceptable substitute, is treated by the Tax Court as the date of filing. (mail box rule) Since timely filing is a jurisdictional requirement, having available proof of timely mailings is paramount in the event the petition is held to be received late, or worse yet, does not arrive at all. The petition must comply with the Tax Court Rules and must contain a clear and concise assignment of each error (allegation of mistakes made by the IRS in law or fact in arriving at their contested position) that the petitioner alleges that the IRS committed in determining the deficiency. Any issue not raised as an assignment of error is deemed conceded (as if the taxpayer accepts the IRS’s position). These rules are the reason why at a minimum, even if a taxpayer intends to represent themselves before tax court (which is a terrible idea), an attorney should be consulted to make sure significant legal rights are not lost with the filing of the petition. **CONTINUED IN THE COMMENTS**
https://wn.com/Basics_Of_Federal_Tax_Litigation
#UnitedStates v.s ##HolyLandFoundation Litigation #JihadInAmerica

#UnitedStates v.s ##HolyLandFoundation Litigation #JihadInAmerica

  • Order:
  • Duration: 6:06
  • Updated: 23 Jun 2016
  • views: 48
videos
The Holy Land Foundation was the largest Islamic charity in the United States. Headquartered in Richardson, Texas, it was originally known as Occupied Land Fund. In December 2001, the U.S. government designated HLF a terrorist organization, seized its assets, and closed the organization. In 2004, a federal grand jury in Dallas, Texas charged HLF and five former officers and employees with providing material support to Hamas and related offenses. The prosecution's theory was that HLF distributed charity through local zakat (charity) committees located in the West Bank; that Hamas controlled those zakat committees; and that by distributing charity through Hamas-controlled committees, HLF helped Hamas win the "hearts and minds" of the Palestinian people. The first trial, in 2007, ended in the partial acquittal of one defendant and a hung jury on all other charges. At a retrial in 2008, the jury found all defendants guilty on all counts. The 2008 trial of the charity leaders was the "largest terrorism financing prosecution in American history." In 2009, the founders of the organization were given sentences of between 15 and 65 years in prison for "funneling $12 million to Hamas." The organization's website stated: "Our mission is to find and implement practical solutions for human suffering through humanitarian programs that impact the lives of the disadvantaged, disinherited, and displaced peoples suffering from man-made and natural disasters." HLF, originally known as the Occupied Land Fund, was established in California in 1989 as a tax-exempt charity. In 1992, HLF relocated to Richardson, Texas. It had offices in California, New Jersey, and Illinois, and individual representatives scattered throughout the US, the West Bank, and Gaza. Among the founders of the Holy Land Foundation is Mousa Mohammed Abu Marzook, a political leader of Hamas, who provided substantial funds to the Holy Land Foundation in the early 1990s, before Hamas was designated a terrorist organization. HLF reported Marzook's donations on its tax returns. Marzook was deported from the US to Jordan in 1997. He was indicted on August 20, 2004, by a US federal grand jury in Chicago, Illinois. He and two other individuals were charged with a 15-year conspiracy to raise funds for terrorist attacks against Israel. Neither HLF nor any HLF officer was charged in the Chicago indictment. In the year 2000, HLF raised over $13 million. According to the United States Department of Treasury, HLF supported Hamas activities through direct fund transfers to its offices in the West Bank and Gaza that are affiliated with Hamas, and transfers of funds to Islamic charity committees ("zakat committees") and other charitable organizations that are part of Hamas or controlled by Hamas members. The Department of Treasury also reported that HLF funds were used by Hamas to support schools that served Hamas's ends by encouraging children to become suicide bombers and to recruit suicide bombers by offering support to their families. Edward Abington, Jr., former U.S. consul general in Jerusalem, acted as a defense witness and testified that during his daily CIA briefings he had never been informed that Hamas controlled the Palestinian charity groups mentioned. The Treasury Department designated HLF as a terrorist organization on December 4, 2001 under President Bush's Executive Order 13224 (Bush). The United States Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Asset Control designated HLF as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist, while the European Union froze its European Assets.
https://wn.com/Unitedstates_V.S_Holylandfoundation_Litigation_Jihadinamerica
The Emerging World of Third-Party Litigation Financing in the United States

The Emerging World of Third-Party Litigation Financing in the United States

  • Order:
  • Duration: 2:06
  • Updated: 11 Apr 2011
  • views: 709
videos
John Beisner, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, discusses the paper "Selling Lawsuits, Buying Trouble: The Emerging World of Third-Party Litigation Financing in the United States," which was released at the 10th Annual Legal Reform Summit on October 28, 2009. This paper begins with an overview of third-party litigation financing. It next examines current third-party financing practices in the United States. It then sets forth a critique of the practice, particularly the incentives it creates to engage in frivolous and abusive litigation. In this section, the paper also presents a case study on the Commonwealth of Australia, the first jurisdiction to permit third-party litigation funding, where such funding has dramatically increased litigation and given investors pervasive — even total — control over a plaintiff's litigation. Finally, the paper proposes that third-party litigation financing be prohibited in the United States to prevent these abuses. At the very least, the paper concludes, such funding should be banned in class actions and other forms of aggregate litigation. The paper can be found online here: http://www.instituteforlegalreform.com/selling-lawsuits-buying-trouble-the-emerging-world-of-third-party-litigation-financing-in-the-united-states.html
https://wn.com/The_Emerging_World_Of_Third_Party_Litigation_Financing_In_The_United_States
United States v. Microsoft: Deposition by Bill Gates, part 1.

United States v. Microsoft: Deposition by Bill Gates, part 1.

  • Order:
  • Duration: 53:18
  • Updated: 03 May 2012
  • views: 106507
videos
United States v. Microsoft was a court case filed against Microsoft by the United States Department of Justice. The plaintiffs alleged that Microsoft abused monopoly power in its handling of operating system sales and web browser sales. The issue central to the case was whether Microsoft was allowed to bundle its flagship Internet Explorer (IE) web browser software with its Windows operating system. Microsoft stated that the merging of Windows and Internet Explorer was the result of innovation and competition, and that the two were now the same product and were inextricably linked together and that consumers were now getting all the benefits of IE for free.
https://wn.com/United_States_V._Microsoft_Deposition_By_Bill_Gates,_Part_1.
US District Court of RI Litigation Academy HD

US District Court of RI Litigation Academy HD

  • Order:
  • Duration: 5:01
  • Updated: 02 Sep 2016
  • views: 304
videos
The “Litigation Academy” is a program of the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island in partnership with Roger Williams University Law School and the Rhode Island Chapter of the Federal Bar Association that was created to provide a low-cost, high-quality forum for teaching practitioners of all experience levels the skills needed to successfully litigate cases. You are welcome to watch a short video of the program that was created by Carlos Andres Toro of Steer Digital Media.
https://wn.com/US_District_Court_Of_Ri_Litigation_Academy_Hd
Frank Easterbrook, "The Supreme Court of the United States and Business Litigation"

Frank Easterbrook, "The Supreme Court of the United States and Business Litigation"

  • Order:
  • Duration: 45:57
  • Updated: 20 Feb 2015
  • views: 441
videos
https://wn.com/Frank_Easterbrook,_The_Supreme_Court_Of_The_United_States_And_Business_Litigation
Litigation Attorney, What Constitutes Someone Being Called A United States Natural Born Citizen

Litigation Attorney, What Constitutes Someone Being Called A United States Natural Born Citizen

  • Order:
  • Duration: 12:09
  • Updated: 12 Feb 2016
  • views: 60292
videos
See also https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/category/natural-born-citizen/ I use the ff. to guide Founding Fathers Intent: "To be a United States Natural Born Citizen, he (or she) must be one of sole nationality, so that were he (or she) ever stripped of citizenship in the United States, he (or she) would be declared as “Stateless. " "...the term ‘natural born citizen’ is used and excludes all persons owing allegiance by birth to foreign states.” The New Englander and Yale Law Review, Volume 3 (1845), p. 414 In 1833, in U.S. Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story's Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. § 1473 “ It is indispensible too, that the president should be a natural born citizen of the United States... to exclude foreign influence from their executive councils and duties." Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803) @174 It cannot be presumed that any clause in the Constitution is intended to be without effect....
https://wn.com/Litigation_Attorney,_What_Constitutes_Someone_Being_Called_A_United_States_Natural_Born_Citizen
Transnational Litigation in United States Courts Concepts and Insights

Transnational Litigation in United States Courts Concepts and Insights

  • Order:
  • Duration: 1:29
  • Updated: 08 Apr 2017
  • views: 0
videos
https://wn.com/Transnational_Litigation_In_United_States_Courts_Concepts_And_Insights
E. Duncan Getchell, Jr. - Healthcare Litigation: U.S. States v. U.S. Government

E. Duncan Getchell, Jr. - Healthcare Litigation: U.S. States v. U.S. Government

  • Order:
  • Duration: 1:12:50
  • Updated: 27 Mar 2012
  • views: 223
videos
America's health care future lies in the balance, and Virginia's Solicitor General E. Duncan Getchell, Jr., is one of the key figures in the legislative battle surrounding "Obamacare." The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is the subject of numerous lawsuits; Getchell was instrumental in the Commonwealth of VA v. Sebelius case, where the State of Virginia claimed the new health care bill infringed on states' rights. Getchell speaks of the current litigation between the 28 states, including Virginia, and the U.S. Government.
https://wn.com/E._Duncan_Getchell,_Jr._Healthcare_Litigation_U.S._States_V._U.S._Government
International Law and Litigation in the United States American Casebook Series

International Law and Litigation in the United States American Casebook Series

  • Order:
  • Duration: 1:34
  • Updated: 06 Apr 2017
  • views: 0
videos
https://wn.com/International_Law_And_Litigation_In_The_United_States_American_Casebook_Series
United States of Monsanto: GMO giant is now litigation proof

United States of Monsanto: GMO giant is now litigation proof

  • Order:
  • Duration: 7:25
  • Updated: 29 Mar 2013
  • views: 20338
videos
After President Obama signed the Agriculture Appropriations Bill into law on Tuesday, hundreds of thousands of people have voiced their opposition to H.R. 933. A provision in the law known as the "Monsanto Protection Act" protects the biotech industry from being sued in a court of law. The Farmer Assurance provision takes the Federal Court's right to halt the sale and use of genetically modified seed crops regardless of health risks. Jeffrey M. Smith, author of Seeds of Deception, joins us to discuss. Find RT America in your area: http://rt.com/where-to-watch/ Or watch us online: http://rt.com/on-air/rt-america-air/ Like us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/RTAmerica Follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/RT_America
https://wn.com/United_States_Of_Monsanto_Gmo_Giant_Is_Now_Litigation_Proof
International Law and Litigation in the United States 2008 Documents Supplement American Casebook Se

International Law and Litigation in the United States 2008 Documents Supplement American Casebook Se

  • Order:
  • Duration: 1:49
  • Updated: 06 Apr 2017
  • views: 0
videos
https://wn.com/International_Law_And_Litigation_In_The_United_States_2008_Documents_Supplement_American_Casebook_Se
United States Body Shop Litigation (CNN Report)

United States Body Shop Litigation (CNN Report)

  • Order:
  • Duration: 10:55
  • Updated: 17 Aug 2015
  • views: 28
videos https://wn.com/United_States_Body_Shop_Litigation_(Cnn_Report)
UVA Law's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Preps for Henderson v. U.S.

UVA Law's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Preps for Henderson v. U.S.

  • Order:
  • Duration: 3:13
  • Updated: 20 Feb 2015
  • views: 583
videos
Professor Daniel Ortiz, director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic at the University of Virginia School of Law, explains the clinic's work and its latest case, Henderson v. United States, which he will argue Feb. 24. Ortiz is the Michael J. and Jane R. Horvitz Distinguished Professor of Law.
https://wn.com/Uva_Law's_Supreme_Court_Litigation_Clinic_Preps_For_Henderson_V._U.S.
Susan Chana Lask's Strip Search Petition for Cert to the US Supreme Court

Susan Chana Lask's Strip Search Petition for Cert to the US Supreme Court

  • Order:
  • Duration: 4:49
  • Updated: 04 Mar 2011
  • views: 1253
videos
New York Attorney Susan Chana Lask speaks with her team at the Stanford Law School Supreme Court Litigation Clinic about her Strip Search Class Action Petition for Writ of Cert to the United States Supreme Court and being a litigator. With Ms. Lask, and as part of her team, is United States Supreme Court specialist Thomas Goldstein of Goldstein, Howell & Russell.
https://wn.com/Susan_Chana_Lask's_Strip_Search_Petition_For_Cert_To_The_US_Supreme_Court
Structure of the Court System: Crash Course Government and Politics #19

Structure of the Court System: Crash Course Government and Politics #19

  • Order:
  • Duration: 6:59
  • Updated: 05 Jun 2015
  • views: 230004
videos
This week Craig Benzine is going to talk about the structure of the U.S. court system and how exactly it manages to keep things moving smoothly. We’’ll talk about trial courts, district courts, appeals courts, circuit courts, state supreme courts, and of course the one at the top - the U.S. Supreme Court. It’s all quite a bit to manage with jurisdictions and such, but it's important to remember that the vast majority of cases never even make it to court! Most are settled out of court, but also terms like mootness and ripeness are used to throw cases out altogether. Today, we're going to focus on how cases make it to the top, and next week we’ll talk about what happens when they get there. Produced in collaboration with PBS Digital Studios: http://youtube.com/pbsdigitalstudios Support is provided by Voqal: http://www.voqal.org All Flickr.com images are licensed under Creative Commons by Attribution 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/legalcode Want to find Crash Course elsewhere on the internet? Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/YouTubeCrashCourse Twitter - http://www.twitter.com/TheCrashCourse Tumblr - http://thecrashcourse.tumblr.com Support Crash Course on Patreon: http://patreon.com/crashcourse CC Kids: http://www.youtube.com/crashcoursekids
https://wn.com/Structure_Of_The_Court_System_Crash_Course_Government_And_Politics_19