Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mmmary who wrote (2530)	3/2/2002 11:54:27 PM
From: EL KABONG!!!	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12465

mmmary, Yes, almost anything can be appealed, though the appeals process doesn't necessarily mean that the default judgement will be set aside. Whatley would have to have sufficient grounds to appeal. Merely stating that he wasn't properly notified isn't (usually) sufficient grounds or basis for setting aside the judgement. The burden of proof that he wasn't notified may possibly be shifted to him, presuming that whatever evidence of proper service that was offered by the plaintiff in the original case was satisfactory to the court. The bottom line is that Whatley's legal costs are now likely to be much higher than they would have been had he responded in the original lawsuit. It's usually more expensive to prevail on appeal than to just properly defend in the first place. But, if he has a legitimate appeal, in theory, he could prevail on appeal, and in theory, he could recover legal costs. But it's more difficult now (in appeals) than it might have been in the original case. My first thoughts when I read the story was that Whatley could have had the case thrown out on jurisdiction, but now??? Who knows? We'll have to wait and watch and see what develops. KJC