|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 08:07 AM EDT |
Thanks, your explanation seems reasonable. I have a terrible memory for names
and faces, but my memory somehow functions well-enough to quickly locate a
section of code that I wrote years ago.
The second part of apples question was "when did Samsung's lawyers know of
the connection between Mr. Hogan and Seagate?"
My instincts (which were already wrong about of an attorney's memory), would
lead me to believe that it was not until after the jury verdict; as the name of
every juror (and other trial participants) as I think that this would not be
something ordinarily discussed between the Samsung lawyers, firm partners, and
then their respective spouses. I think it is more a case of Mr. Hogan's name
coming up in the multiple interviews after the verdict.
Is this reasonable? That his name was unlikely to have been mentioned during the
trial in a conversation between a partner and spouse.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|