Talk:Trial de novo

"Trial De Novo" is not " De Novo"
It does but what was is being questioned is the whole phrase, "trial de novo" not just de novo, and should it be merged with new trial. That would be like merging sombrero and hat. They are the same but different.

Why does 'de novo' direct here? Has it always redirected here? I've reached this page from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzyme_kinetics


 * "Enzyme concentration. De novo synthesis (the production of more enzyme molecules) increases catalysis rates."

What has this got to do with law? Doesn't 'de novo' mean 'anew', 'afresh'? In particular, biologically-speaking, 'de novo' means 'newly-synthesised'. I don't know how to make 'de novo' a page of its own. Until I find out, or someone else does it, I'm going to add a section to this article.

http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/de_novo http://www.answers.com/topic/de-novo http://www.thefreedictionary.com/de%20novo

Other Uses
"Trial De Novo" is a legal term —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.241.158.129 (talk) 01:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The following sections: "De novo, biological usage" "De novo, finance usage". Would be better as seperate articles, with a disambig page linking them all. "De novo, general usage" is a definition of a word, probally better on wiktionary, with a link on the proposed disambig page as well. Xaosflux 16:17, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Trial de novo is an uncommon term
de novo review on the other hand is much more common and has much wider application in Anglo-American Law. This article needs to cite something meaningful. ghits on this term refer to appellate procedure not "new trial" of civil procedure as the article suggests. Suggest this article be changed to a redirect to de novo review and that article address the appellate term.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 20:38, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Rather than the other way around as currently exists.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 20:39, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Rewrite
This article needs a rewrite by someone who knows law (which is not me). The following post was copied here from Talk:New trial:

 The "Trial de novo"" article is a confused mash-up of (i) de novo review of lower court or tribunal decisions by appellate courts and (ii) new trials by trial courts as the result of a remand by an appellate court. They are two completely different things, but the trial de novo article has managed to mix them up. Not suprising, given that the article is virtually unsourced. NYBrad is correct to break the redirect, but the trial de novo article must be rewritten. Fladrif (talk) 02:37, 28 December 2010 (UTC) 

D O N D E groovily  Talk to me  04:50, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

And it needs an international (non-common law) perspective from a knowledgeable editor. Brmull (talk) 08:57, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Rewrite Redux
As editor Fladrif noted above, this article is not accurate. Not surprisingly, the article on Appeal is also in similar shape. I'm going to look for an appropriate tag and leave a note on the WikiProject Law page. Malke 2010 (talk) 21:17, 14 December 2011 (UTC)