Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Judge Koh asks Apple's attorneys if they're 'smoking crack' | 86 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

Judge Koh asks Apple's attorneys if they're 'smoking crack'

Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 16 2012 @ 04:28 PM EDT

I'm curious as to what happens if Samsung runs out of time and Apple calls more
witnesses. My understanding is you can't call a witness that cannot be cross
examined, but isn't the cross time part of the time alloted?

Is this some thing like a chess clock or Go ( Byo-yomi ) where someone counts
down the time?

OK I was being facetous with the last part. I couldn't resist.
I am however serious about the first part.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Judge Koh asks Apple's attorneys if they're 'smoking crack' - Authored by: PJ on Thursday, August 16 2012 @ 04:36 PM EDT
- Judge Koh asks Apple's attorneys if they're 'smoking crack' - Authored by: Wol on Thursday, August 16 2012 @ 08:02 PM EDT
  - Sounds like some simple objections are needed - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 21 2012 @ 12:14 PM EDT
- Judge Koh asks Apple's attorneys if they're 'smoking crack' - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 16 2012 @ 08:42 PM EDT

It's a good job the jury won't hear about this

Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 17 2012 @ 05:52 AM EDT

Or else it might be considered far more prejudicial to the case than Samsung
reminding the press of the existence of some already public facts in the public
domain.

Am I right, Judge Snippypants? One rule for everyone, yes?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )