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
Judge Koh Rules - No Injunction for Apple; No New Trial on Jury Misconduct for Samsung ~ pj Updated | 302 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Judge Koh Rules - No Injunction for Apple; No New Trial on Jury Misconduct for Samsung ~ pj Updated
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 18 2012 @ 02:22 PM EST
Hogan's statements to the press were admissions against interest and so
admissible as a hearsay exception.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Judge Koh Rules - No Injunction for Apple; No New Trial on Jury Misconduct for Samsung ~ pj Updated
Authored by: OpenSourceFTW on Tuesday, December 18 2012 @ 02:32 PM EST
I don't "think" that is is unfair. The fact is that it "is"
unfair. If I thought it was fair it would still be unfair.

My reasoning process is irrelevant when the facts of the case state that there
are major problems with the verdict and with the foreman. What I think is
unimportant, but what actually happened is.
Please think about the following:

Concerning Hogan: Did he or did he not say to the media that they wanted to
"punish" Samsung? - Yes

Concerning the governing case law: does it or does it not explicitly state that
the jury is not to impose punitive damages in this type of case? - Yes

Therefore, is this a problem?: - Yes, probably enough to warrant a new trial,
but IANAL

Concerning Hogan: Did he or did he not state to the media that he was not
expected to disclose old cases? - Yes

Did this case pose a conflict of interest problem for Samsung? - Yes, business
relationship with Seagate

Concerning the judge: did she or did she not ask another juror about an
"old" case in Hogan's hearing? - Yes

Concerning the judge: did she or did she not ask Hogan about a detail from an
"old" case? - Yes

Therefore, does this not imply that Hogan failed to disclose a case that he
should have disclosed - Yes

Concerning Hogan: did he or did he not mention his alternate theory for
excluding the prior art available to the jury, and did he not reveal this to the
media? - Yes

Was this presented by an official expert - No

Is this valid testimony - No

Therefore, did Hogan improperly influence the jury - Yes, by his own admission

Please explain how my personal views change any one of the facts above. And
please explain how the facts above do not warrant a new trial.

---
I voted for Groklaw (Legal Technology Category) in the 2012 ABA Journal Blawg
100. Did you? http://www.abajournal.com/blawg100. Voting ends Dec 21.

[ 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 )