386 research outputs found
Reuben Ellis photograph
No full textReuben Ellis of Hamilton County, was electrocuted February 6, 1917 for the Murder of Anna hart
Philip Strong letter to Reuben Wood, January 27, 1852
No full textLegal correspondence written by Philip Strong to Governor Reuben Wood regarding a warrant to arrest Peyton Polly, dated January 27, 1852.
Reuben Wood was governor of Ohio from 1850 through 1853, and was closely involved with the Peyton Polly case and attempts to secure the Polly family's release. Peyton Polly and his family were freedmen living in Lawrence County, Ohio, when they were kidnapped on June 6, 1850, and sold back into slavery in Kentucky and Virginia
Stanley Matthews letter to Reuben Wood, March 23, 1852
No full textLetter written to Governor Reuben Wood by Stanley Matthews in support of the appointment of Donn Piatt to a position in the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas, March 23, 1852. Stanley Matthews (1824-1889) was at the time a judge in the court. He secured a seat in the Ohio Senate in 1856 before being appointed U.S. District Attorney for Southern Ohio in 1858, and later served as a justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1881 to 1889.
Reuben Wood was governor of Ohio from 1850 through 1853, and was closely involved with the Peyton Polly case and attempts to secure the Polly family's release. Peyton Polly and his family were freedmen living in Lawrence County, Ohio, when they were kidnapped on June 6, 1850, and sold back into slavery in Kentucky and Virginia
The racial romance of Amy Levy's "Reuben Sachs"
No full textOn its publication in 1888, Reuben Sachs by Amy Levy (1861-1889) was initially received as being anti-Semitic in both the Jewish and the mainstream presses. Many reviews were scathingly critical, and some singled out the author for special abuse ...Peer reviewedFinal article published
Peyton Polly legal fees document
No full textDocumentation of legal fees incurred by attorneys in the legal case of Peyton Polly, received and paid by the office of Governor Reuben Wood, March 10, 1852. Ralph Leete was prosecuting attorney for Lawrence County, Ohio, and led the legal effort to secure the freedom of family members in the case of Peyton Polly.
Reuben Wood was governor of Ohio from 1850 through 1853, and was closely involved with the Peyton Polly case and attempts to secure the Polly family's release. Peyton Polly and his family were freedmen living in Lawrence County, Ohio, when they were kidnapped on June 6, 1850, and sold back into slavery in Kentucky and Virginia
Bland Ballard letter to Ralph Leete, March 18, 1852
No full textCopy of a letter written by Bland Ballard of Louisville, Kentucky, inquiring about outstanding fees owed in the legal case of Peyton Polly, from the papers of Ohio Governor Reuben Wood. Ballard was a District Judge in the United States District Court for the District of Kentucky, while Leete was prosecuting attorney for Lawrence County, Ohio, and led the legal effort to secure the freedom of family members in the case of Peyton Polly.
Reuben Wood was governor of Ohio from 1850 through 1853, and was closely involved with the Peyton Polly case and attempts to secure the Polly family's release. Peyton Polly and his family were freedmen living in Lawrence County, Ohio, when they were kidnapped on June 6, 1850, and sold back into slavery in Kentucky and Virginia
Jere Nash Interview with Reuben V. Anderson
No full textInterview conducted by author Jere Nash with former civil rights attorney and Mississippi Supreme Court justice Reuben V. Anderson in the process of writing Mississippi Politics: The Struggle for Power, 1976-2006. Topics covered include Anderson\u27s family, religion, and education; Tougaloo College and the civil rights movement; attending University of Mississippi Law School; integation of Oxford locales; Jack Young; working as a civil rights lawyer in Jackson, Mississippi and for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund; Marian Wright Edelman; Lawrence Guyot; Lawyers\u27 Committee for Civil Rights Under Law in Jackson; Judge Harold Cox; handling the credentials fight for the Loyalists at the 1968 Democratic National Convention; Charles Evers; Aaron Henry; generational differences among factions of civil rights activists; Charles Evers\u27 1968 congressional campaign; Robert Clark; appointed as municipal court judge; Russell Davis; Eddie McBride\u27s 1972 congressional race; political races of African American candidates; Cliff Finch and appointment to Hinds County Court; Jimmy Carter; William Winter and appointment to Hinds County Circuit Court; registering to vote; Bill Allain and appointment to the Mississippi Supreme Court; Fred Banks; and the Mississippi State flag vote in 2001
Susceptibility to fraud in systematic reviews: lessons from the Reuben case
No full textBACKGROUND: Dr. Scott Reuben allegedly fabricated data. The authors of the current article examined the impact of Reuben reports on conclusions of systematic reviews. METHODS: The authors searched in ISI Web of Knowledge systematic reviews citing Reuben reports. Systematic reviews were grouped into one of three categories: I, only cited but did not include Reuben reports; II, retrieved and considered, but eventually excluded Reuben reports; III, included Reuben reports. For quantitative systematic reviews (i.e., meta-analyses), a relevant difference was defined as a significant result becoming nonsignificant (or vice versa) by excluding Reuben reports. For qualitative systematic reviews, each author decided independently whether noninclusion of Reuben reports would have changed conclusions. RESULTS: Twenty-five systematic reviews (5 category I, 6 category II, 14 category III) cited 27 Reuben reports (published 1994-2007). Most tested analgesics in surgical patients. One of 6 quantitative category III reviews would have reached different conclusions without Reuben reports. In all 6 (30 subgroup analyses involving Reuben reports), exclusion of Reuben reports never made any difference when the number of patients from Reuben reports was less than 30% of all patients included in the analysis. Of 8 qualitative category III reviews, all authors agreed that one would certainly have reached different conclusions without Reuben reports. For another 4, the authors' judgment was not unanimous. CONCLUSIONS: Carefully performed systematic reviews proved robust against the impact of Reuben reports. Quantitative systematic reviews were vulnerable if the fraudulent data were more than 30% of the total. Qualitative systematic reviews seemed at greater risk than quantitative
Susceptibility to fraud in systematic reviews: lessons from the Reuben case
No full textUdgivelsesdato: 2009-DecBACKGROUND: Dr. Scott Reuben allegedly fabricated data. The authors of the current article examined the impact of Reuben reports on conclusions of systematic reviews. METHODS: The authors searched in ISI Web of Knowledge systematic reviews citing Reuben reports. Systematic reviews were grouped into one of three categories: I, only cited but did not include Reuben reports; II, retrieved and considered, but eventually excluded Reuben reports; III, included Reuben reports. For quantitative systematic reviews (i.e., meta-analyses), a relevant difference was defined as a significant result becoming nonsignificant (or vice versa) by excluding Reuben reports. For qualitative systematic reviews, each author decided independently whether noninclusion of Reuben reports would have changed conclusions. RESULTS: Twenty-five systematic reviews (5 category I, 6 category II, 14 category III) cited 27 Reuben reports (published 1994-2007). Most tested analgesics in surgical patients. One of 6 quantitative category III reviews would have reached different conclusions without Reuben reports. In all 6 (30 subgroup analyses involving Reuben reports), exclusion of Reuben reports never made any difference when the number of patients from Reuben reports was less than 30% of all patients included in the analysis. Of 8 qualitative category III reviews, all authors agreed that one would certainly have reached different conclusions without Reuben reports. For another 4, the authors' judgment was not unanimous. CONCLUSIONS: Carefully performed systematic reviews proved robust against the impact of Reuben reports. Quantitative systematic reviews were vulnerable if the fraudulent data were more than 30% of the total. Qualitative systematic reviews seemed at greater risk than quantitative
Justifying patents: a critique of the deontological approach
No full textThis thesis assesses philosophical arguments in favour of patent systems. These come in both consequentialist and deontological forms, the latter of which are the focus of this analysis. One kind of deontological argument is based on the concept of desert. I argue that on any plausible conception of desert, the patent system fails to distribute rewards as well as viable alternative systems could. The other kind of deontological argument claims that inventors are entitled to patent rights over their inventions as an extension of their natural rights, drawing on a Lockean account of the conditions of legitimate appropriation of unowned goods. After a discussion of the metaphysics of invention, and of the nature of the commons, I argue that Locke's conditions are not in fact always trivially satisfied in the case of patents. Furthermore, entitlement-based arguments conclude that because new inventions are unowned, claiming property rights in them involves only the same moral considerations that would apply in the state of nature. I argue that because we are not in the state of nature, pre-existing property rights also need to be taken into account, which conflict with patents. The broad conclusion of this thesis is that none of the plausible deontological arguments for patent systems are sound. The implication is that any justification of must therefore be made in consequentialist terms; this ultimately rests on strong empirical evidence rather than normative arguments alone
- …
