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.

Technology Stocks : Ampex Corporation (AEXCA) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Swamp Fox who wrote (8411)	5/13/1999 9:59:00 PM
From: mph	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17679

"throwing out a motion for summary judgment" is not very accurate. Undoubtedly the judge denied a motion for summary judgment. This doesn't mean that he made a decision about the merits of the case one way or another. A motion for summary judgment requests the court to enter judgment in favor of the moving party or against the opposing party as a matter of law. In order to make that decision, the court must be shown that there are no material facts in dispute and that the moving party is entitled to the judgment it seeks as a matter of law. Thus, if there is any material fact in dispute, the motion must be denied. It must also be denied if there are no material facts in dispute but the moving party as a matter of law is not entitled to the judgment it seeks. Parties who file unsuccessful motions for summary judgment can still win at trial. These motions are usually denied because of a factual dispute which must be resolved by the trier of fact (judge or jury). mph

To: Swamp Fox who wrote (8411)	5/13/1999 10:11:00 PM
From: Sleeper	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17679

Disclaimer: I am not an attorney. Just been there, done that... "...throwing out ERICY's call for a summary judgement..." DOES this mean the plantiff - IDC - has a strong case?? NO It means that the the court has found that the IDC lawsuit is apparently not frivolous and therefore the lawsuit may proceed. It does not establish the validity of IDC's claims. It also makes the awarding of legal fees incurred by ERICY less likely in the event they (ERICY) prevails. Sleeper

To: Swamp Fox who wrote (8411)	5/13/1999 10:34:00 PM
From: Carl R.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17679

Did you post this to me because I am an attorney? I am a licensed attorney in Nebraska but do not practice. I will answer, but please do not construe my answer as legal advice. You are not my client, and you need to do your own legal research or consult with your own attorney. A request for summary judgement is a request to have a case thrown out prior to trial. These are very frequently requested, and very rarely granted. In order to grant it, the judge needs to believe that there is absolutely no evidence that the plaintiff could possibly produce that could justify a victory. Even if the possibility of victory by the plaintiff is extremely remote, so long as it is theoretically possible a summary judgement should not be granted. In the rare cases where the motion is granted the judge is essentially saying "even if everything that the plaintiff says is completely true and can be proved to the satisfaction of the court, there is still absolutely no legal justification for awarding him a verdict". As a practical matter even if a judge believes that a victory by the plaintiff is a very remote possibility, he will not award a summary judgement. Rather he will allow both sides to present evidence before taking action. After the evidence has been presented he can order a directed verdict, or he can just wait for the jury (if there is one) to decide the issue, and if he disagrees, he can order a judgement notwithstanding the verdict. One reason judges are reluctant to order summary judgements is that in order to prepare for trial, he needs to learn about the case. If he orders a summary judgement and it is overturned on appeal he will have to start over from scratch and relearn the case all over. It is simpler and less likely to be overturned if he goes ahead and has the trial, and then after the evidence is in, takes action. Then he is less likely to be reversed on appeal, and if he is, there will be less to do when the case is remanded. Declining to award a summary judgement does not mean that the case has significant merit. It does not mean that plaintiff is likely to win. All it means is that it is not impossible that plaintiff could win. Carl