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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: olivier asser who wrote (89875)	1/25/2005 8:56:57 PM
From: Janice Shell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

I know of one case--and of course there may be more--that was tried in a California State court that was subsequently recognized as a precedent by a California Federal court. This came up in the context of the Webnode suit; Bill or Jeff may remember more about it than I do now. And as I said: I'm not absolutely sure that it was a New York state court; only that it was tried in New York.

To: olivier asser who wrote (89875)	1/25/2005 11:07:56 PM
From: Bill Ulrich	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Nah. If there's no Fed precedent, it doesn't mean a lawyer isn't allowed to make a case based on a State precedent. Particularly if it's a new area of law, such as SLAPP cases were back in the late 90s. The lawyer can make it, the judge decides whether it's compelling enough. Sometimes it works; the judge being open-minded for it. Sometimes the judge blows it off. But this categorical statement just ain't true: "That ruling would hold absolutely no weight as it was a state court decision of no precedential value in a federal question case brought in a United States Court."