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 what you are talking about happened outside the court | 249 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
I think what you are talking about happened outside the court
Authored by: Wol on Sunday, October 21 2012 @ 05:09 PM EDT
Much as I may think Hogan is shady, I am VERY unhappy with the argument.

IF YOU READ THE TRANSCRIPT it goes something like this:

JUDGE: Have any of you prospective jurors been involved in a lawsuit?

Hogan puts his hand up.

JUDGE: Okay Mr Hogan.

HOGAN: In 2008 blah blah blah

JUDGE: Thank you Mr Hogan. Next prospective juror? ...

So yes, Hogan should have mentioned it, but there is NO evidence he concealed
it. The Judge cut him off before he had a chance to mention it. Maybe he should
have gone back to it, but he's not a lawyer. If the Judge seemed satisfied, who
was he to argue with her? (And we get the impression she can be rather
preremptory and seems to have a short fuse.)

Cheers,
Wol

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

No. Not when it didn't happen. Something else happened.
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, October 21 2012 @ 05:49 PM EDT
"Lies by omission are real lies."

No, not when what you didn't mention didn't happen in the first place! Hogan
never sued Seagate for fraud (nor ever countersued them for fraud) as far as we
know, therefore it wasn't a lie to not mention any such lawsuit about fraud
during jury selection. (Yes, he told a reporter that he filed such a lawsuit,
but that seems to have been a lie.)

Note that the OP was *not* taking about the lawsuit where Seagate sued Hogan for
breach of contract (not fraud). That's something completely different. As Wol
pointed out (above), it's even possible to construe the questioning as if Hogan
didn't have to mention that lawsuit, either. (Personally, I think Wol is
overstating it, but it's at least arguable.) But the OP and the reply were not
talking about that lawsuit, anyway, so it's not relevant here.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

fraud != breach of contract
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, October 21 2012 @ 06:00 PM EDT
I wrote another reply just above, but don't think I was clear. I'm trying
again.

Hogan apparently lied and told a reporter that he filed a *fraud* complaint
against Seagate. Since that never happened, as far as we know, he shouldn't have
claimed it happened in the court. He didn't claim it happened in court, so he
didn't lie about it in court.

The real case was a *breach of contract* case Seagate brought against Hogan.
That's something completely different. The OP and the reply weren't talking
about that.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

If it existed, why couldn't PJ confirm it?
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, October 21 2012 @ 06:19 PM EDT
OP quoting PJ:
> You'd think it [Hogan's fraud complaint against Seagate]
> would be found somewhere, but so far I've been unable to
> confirm it.

I take that to mean, "You'd think that if Hogan's fraud complaint was real,
it would be found somewhere..." In other words, there wasn't any such fraud
complaint. Hogan apparently lied to the reporter (but not to the court) about
it.

[ 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 )