|
|
|
| Authored by: Wol on Thursday, January 31 2013 @ 06:40 AM EST |
But at least it's given Samsung plenty of ammo for appeal, to kick upstairs.
Seeing as Justice doesn't seem to enter into it, I don't know how persuasive the
argument can be, but at least Samsung has the Judge onside when they argue
"the verdict is clearly unjust".
Thing is, does the Appeal Court think it has the authority to put things right?
If it decides to act as a Court of Equity, I presume it does, but will it?
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, January 31 2013 @ 09:53 PM EST |
Under US law, judges determine matters of law, Juries
determine matters of fact. The jury can decide the sky is
tartan in color if they want to and so long as there isn't a
question on a matter of law and no procedural violations
have taken place there's not a thing the judge, or the
appeals court for that matter, can do about it.
This is precisely how it should be and must be. If a judge
can just overturn a juries decision on a matter of fact just
because they disagree with it, we may as well just ditch
juries entirely as they would serve no purpose.
Juries provide a check on the power of the state, that's
their purpose. They don't always serve that purpose well,
but if judges could ignore them at will they'd serve it not
at all.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
