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: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (92438)	9/9/2005 1:38:14 AM
From: Bill Ulrich	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Appeals are based on one side having a dispute with the ruling they received, fair or not. They cite a case of Jimmy Bagadonutz vs. Acme Corp, and the other side cites a case of Widgets Inc. vs. Joe Sixpack. Then the Appeals Courts decides which facts of what precedent are applicable towards the current case. Again, provably persuasive, because you can't say both or either precedents are wrong, because ... then one of them wouldn't be "fair". And what you really hope is that your lawyer's 2nd string junior clerk who is looking up all the arcane precedents, sneezing in dusty books, is doing a good job, because that's what your lawyer is going to write his argument on. Again, persuasiveness overrides fairness. It really becomes a clerical battle to a certain extent. Which lawyer has the best flunkie to look up old stuff to return to the lawyer so he can write a case using old stuff as a modern argument?