|
|
|
| Authored by: feldegast on Monday, August 27 2012 @ 09:12 PM EDT |
You mean like the exclusion of prior art evidance by the
judge because it was filed 1 day late due to translation
issues iirc?
---
IANAL
My posts are ©2004-2012 and released under the Creative Commons License
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0
P.J. has permission for commercial use.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- What if? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 27 2012 @ 09:47 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: celtic_hackr on Monday, August 27 2012 @ 11:39 PM EDT |
How about the Jury foreman using his expert knowledge to instruct the rest of
the jury, where he should have actually gotten the court to give that direction.
Samsung had no chance to cross examine the foreman or indeed even perform a voir
dire of his expertise.
He offered himself up as an expert, but how do we know he gave anything close to
the correct information? It was not performed in open court, there is no record
of it in public record, and at least one other juror found his expertise useful
in decision making.
It all sounds very much like reason to nullify the jury verdict. In fact that
very reason is used quite often in overturning verdicts.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
