|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 23 2013 @ 12:39 PM EST |
Maybe. Who knows?
That's the trouble- people will read into it what they want,
or hope. It might be true- neither you, nor I, have any idea
based on the pleadings. It's all speculation.
However, based on experience, I would say this. If a party,
after a verdict, asked for more discovery, I would
immediately file an opposition (a very short one) explaining
that no, you don't get any more discovery.
If a party, after a verdict, asked for more discovery so
that they could help themselves in a different case, in a
different court, I would do a double-take, then write the
same opposition.
I wouldn't give them an inch, even if I knew the discovery
wouldn't hurt my client, *because they're not entitled to
it*. If I opened the door to that procedurally-unsound
request, who knows what would come down the pike next?
Litigation (and discovery) has to end sometime, you know?
It's not called the "help the other party" system. It's
called an "adversarial" system. Samsung's lawyers are free
to ask, but it is a pretty ballsy ask. But you never know
what you're going to get if you don't ask. :)[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- No - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 23 2013 @ 02:23 PM EST
- Nope - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, January 24 2013 @ 10:31 AM EST
|
|
|
