|
0 members (),
6
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums59
Topics17,128
Posts314,541
Members6,305
| |
Most Online294
Dec 6th, 2017
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 47,430 Likes: 373
Member CHB-OG
|
Member CHB-OG
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 47,430 Likes: 373 |
PIA, can you expand on your post? What does this mean? A higher court could always send it back as "reinstated", but if he already has a verdict maybe they won't bother. 
Contrarian, extraordinaire
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 12,129 Likes: 257
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 12,129 Likes: 257 |
When her suit was filed originally, this judge dismissed it for lack of evidence. She appealed it, and the appeals court sent it back to the judge to be tried, based on some technicality. They retried it, he dismissed it again, and now the jury has actually found against Governor Palin. An appeals court could always reinstate the suit based on some other technicality. But I think the judge had the jury continue deliberations until they reached a decision, just so the appeals court would not bother with sending it back again. The jury verdict says: "You can send it back as many times as you want, and it's always going to be garbage."
Educating anyone benefits everyone.
|
|
1 member likes this:
pdx rick |
|
|
|
|
