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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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
Ouch - but ... | 217 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Ouch - but ...
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 28 2012 @ 09:27 AM EST
Personally, I like judges having the ability to say "Don't be an idiot, you
have no case". If they can say that soon enough, then they can save
defendants a huge pile of trouble from lawsuit harrassment.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • Ouch - but ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 28 2012 @ 02:27 PM EST
Ouch - but ...
Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, November 28 2012 @ 05:38 PM EST
Sorry. I've been offline in my so-called
real life.

Judges leave factual questions to the jury,
but they don't pretend that gravity doesn't
exist, so some facts are just facts, not
in dispute.

And sometimes a judge can decide that a jury
got the facts so wrong he has to overrule
their decision on something. This judge did
that regarding the test files, or rangeCheck,
I forget which.

So judges do not turn to pillars of salt if
they rule on a fact. It's just there are
rules about it.

Trust me that if you go before a judge and
claim that when you pushed your wife off the
balconey, it wasn't murder because sometimes
people go up instead of down, he will for
sure tell you your theory is nonsense.

And there is another factor you are not
remembering: this was partly a jury trial and
partly bench. Some issues were left to the judge
instead of the jury, per stipulation.

[ 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 )