decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
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

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
I think he should be charged with misconduct | 751 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
I think he should be charged with misconduct
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 11:53 PM EDT
He has caused literally millions of dollars to be wasted, and (probably more
important to Samsung) while this trial was going on, some of Samsung's products
languished under an injunction. Apple is using the court system to interfere
with Samsung's business (anti-competition is after all, the whole point of
patents) and so far Samsung hasn't been too successful doing the same back to
Apple.

And that's only the situation because he got caught! He misled the court in
voir dire; he got onto the jury with an agenda, and steered the jury into a
>$1billion verdict against Samsung. Then went to the media to cheer himself
on. The damage to Samsung if this had not been unearthed, would have been 20x
worse than it already was.

And now, solely because of Hogan's conduct, this whole farce is going to drag on
for _months_ longer than it otherwise would have. A new trial is necessary if
anyone cares about getting a fair/just result (whether Judge Koh will allow that
or not, remains to be seen... but if she doesn't grant it after this, I will be
shocked--that would leave her reputation in complete tatters).

[ 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 )