[News] Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. | ANN.lu |
Posted on 16-Nov-2003 08:23 GMT by Rich Woods | 263 comments View flat View list |
Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003 in Washington Federal District Court.
Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003 in Washington Federal District Court.
It also looks like Amiga is again without counsel.
"This matter comes before the Court on "Plantiffs' Motion for Judgement and dismissal of Counter Claims for Lack of Representation." Although corporations must be represented by counsel, defendant's failure to retain new counsel has not yet been given rise to a sanctionable failure to prosecute. Plantiff's motion for judgement and dismissal of the counterclaims is DENIED. Defendant must, however, obtain counsel to defend this litigation if it hopes to avoid an adverse ruling on plaantiff's pending motion for summary judgement.
DATED this 7th day of November,2003.
/s/
robert S. Lasnik
United States District Judge
Get it here .
|
|
List of all comments to this article |
Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 56 of 263 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Rich Woods on 17-Nov-2003 02:27 GMT | In reply to Comment 51 (TheRealNapster): Motion for Summary Judgement Against Amiga to be Heard on Nov 21, 2003. : Comment 51 of 55
Posted by TheRealNapster (Trusted user) on 17-Nov-2003 00:23:53
In Reply to Comment 42:
@ Dick Woods
I wrote:
There are PLENTY of BULLSH!T cases that are heard in court every day. They don't just throw them out....
---
You replied:
Apparently after 10 months of litigation the judge has seen fit to allow both parties to continue -
---
I reply:
Exactly my point. It's been 10 months, they don't just throw cases out because they're Bullsh1t.
I'm a little surprised, but thanks for supporting my point :)
-------------------
Nope - just you don't understand the point being made - not suprising.
The point is the case wasn't thrown out as I mentioned - if it was a bs case it would have been thrown out in the preliminary hearings.
do you understand anything about preliminary court proceedings? Especially FEDERAL proceedings? |
|
List of all comments to this article (continued) |
|
- User Menu
-
- About ANN archives
- The ANN archives is powered by #AmigaZeux. It was updated daily (news last: 22-Oct-2004; comments last: 18-May-2005).
ANN.lu was created, previously owned and maintained by Christian Kemp, www.ckemp.com.
- Contribute
- Not possible at this time!
- Search ANN archives
- Advanced search
- Hosting
- ANN.lu was hosted by Dreamhost. Sign up through this link, mention "ckemp" as referrer and he will get a 10% commission on any account you purchase.
Please show your appreciation for any past, present and future work on ANN.lu by making a contribution via PayPal.
|