|
| Authored by: fredex on Wednesday, May 08 2013 @ 06:50 PM EDT |
| Could the current judge be convinced to hand the case over to judge Posner? :) [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 08 2013 @ 07:02 PM EDT |
Well, there's certainly enough record for the judge to do that...
MSS2[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: egan on Wednesday, May 08 2013 @ 11:06 PM EDT |
It is at least conceivable that the judge could do something like that.
Suppose that, in consideration of SCO's latest motion, the judge reviews the
entire record of SCO v. IBM and finds that the previous court ruled against all
of SCO's claims in its amended complaint. In that case, the judge might
rule that SCO has no claims remaining at issue upon which relief can be granted.
The judge might then rule that SCO therefore lacks standing to request that the
court reopen its complaint. Game, set and match.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 09 2013 @ 12:31 PM EDT |
Remember the Dec 1, 2009 hearing in SCO v. Novell, before
Judge Stewart? Novell wanted to start the trial in June; SCO
wanted March. Judge Stewart asked Michael Jacobs why they
wanted the delay; Jacobs said they needed to make sure the
court was fully briefed on what had already been mooted by
the 10thCCoA ruling. Stewart told him that wasn't necessary,
he could figure it out for himself.
I would be entirely unsurprised if Judge Nuffer took the
same tack - I mean, which side is he going to view as
qualified to make an unbiased assessment of what Judge
Stewart's ruling meant? Particularly when there is
absolutely no impediment to Judge Nuffer just walking down
the hall to Judge Stewart's chambers for a little chat?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
