Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    34440
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by TwiceHorn

  1. See, here's where you're wrong. The Supreme Court has never really cared about facts. Those get handled in the courts below. It may be more obvious that the court is cherry-picking cases with certain fact patterns now that it is full-on activist, but that's the way it has always been.
  2. It is an inherently pay-for-play system. I'm not sure how we escape that. Public defenders are getting better in the criminal arena because of the spotlight you mention. There are other areas, such as contingent-fee litigation, where little or smaller guys are getting top-notch, vigorous representation, but that's in pretty limited circumstances in civil cases. Trumpco is milking available procedures for all they are worth, but it's not working very well outside of Cannon's court, as you note, even in the pretty short term. One thing we have to acknowledge is that Trump is unprecedented in virtually every area that pertains to government institution and his abuse of same. The institutions were unprepared for the likes of him. In the courts, that lack of preparation takes the form of novel legal questions, so-called "issues of first impression." As a corrupt former President, Trump has presented those in spades unfortunately. But the judicial system has dealt with them better than other institutions of government. As has been noted, courts are a fundamentally fact-based forum, where Trump's bullshit is far less likely to work than other fora.
  3. Imputation or presumption of a cause of action or offense, particularly the elements of an offense like fraud (usually requires clear and convincing evidence, etc.) poses pretty serious due process concerns in a criminal context, possibly civil as well.
  4. I think the various weather reporting outlets may be "over reporting" severe weather for clicks. It may just be the weird weather patterns, but it often seems like they make things more dire than they actually are. Of course, the Storm Prediction Center can make that easy and I don't think they're angling for clicks.
  5. Probably a decent argument that 1.5 hours after the crash, it rose to .105 and at the time of the crash was below.
  6. I remember when it happened, I was just venturing outside of the sports boards and wasn't very integrated into the community. I do remember that information about it was hard to come by as the mods quickly deleted anything that referenced it much, particularly in any way that might have implicated her privacy or that of her family. It was shrouded in mystery at the time, particularly for someone who hadn't known the back story.
  7. And, it's kind of nutty to spring the idea of a confidential deposition when there are not any previous protective orders or other secrecy provisions. Because, unless you can claim some kind of surprise inquiry at the deposition, it's pretty hard to go back to the court and try to make discovery/depositions confidential after the fact. Quinn Emmanuel is, overall, a super-competent firm like Susman Godfrey, meaning they rarely fuck up. But this would seem to be a fuck up if they're serious or Musk is about keeping it confidential. Quinn Emmanuel attorneys are frequently dicks, too. Arrogant.
  8. Right, I guess that's part of it. I think, though, that captainant is right, until the bond issues are resolved one way or another, execution is halted.
  9. Who said I trust Trump? I do not. I am, generally speaking, pro-defendant yes. So I appreciate the rights that are afforded those who take advantage of them (sometimes that's an issue of nothing but money, sometimes it's not). The very issue we are discussing is the supersedeas bond and whether it is adequate under the law. Neither I nor gator are assuming that it is. We are explaining that Trump's lawyers likely have little or no control over the bond document itself and whether it is adequate under NY law. That is mostly or entirely the purview of the bonding institution. Whether Trump and his lawyers made misrepresentations to the court about his financial condition to secure the reduced bond is a separate issue from the bond document itself. As noted above, reduction of the bond from the full judgment amount to some fraction of the defendant's net worth is not a novel concept. It is embodied in the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, for example “the amount must not exceed the lesser of:(A) 50 percent of the judgment debtor's current net worth; or(B) 25 million dollars.” And it is present in the law for the benefit of the little guy facing a jumbo judgment. Is it possible that Trump's lawyers instructed the bonding institution to work in some unlawful loopholes to the bond? Fuck yeah it is. But that's going to require some proof, not an assumption that that is the reason for the inadequacy of the bonding instrument. And it's risky as hell, because the court could order the institution to make good on the bond, regardless. Either way in this process, the judgment will be at least partially secured or James will be permitted to execute. It's basically a win-win for the plaintiff. If you consider the right to execute a win. Although watching the execution might be a total blast from the "fuck with Trump" perspective, its purpose is to satisfy the judgment and from that perspective, it might not be so much fun for James.
  10. Itemize for us the lenient shit he's gotten from Engoron's court.
  11. This isn't a penalty scenario. The bond represents cash on the table to the plaintiff if they prevail on the appeal. If there's no bond, there's execution. 99/100 plaintiffs would rather have the bond, provided it's a legitimate bond. Even if it's only approximately half the judgment, if that is affirmed. That's 150M they didn't have to lift a finger to get. Everyone keeps rooting for execution of the judgment as if that's some kind of penalty. It's the natural course of things and a slow and awkward way to collect a judgment, likely in cents on the dollar. It's not designed as a penalty, just as putting up a bond is not a penalty, but both are costly for the defendant.
  12. The institution prepares the bond, and their lawyers. As a general proposition, the defendant's lawyers don't really know shit about the bond itself. It's sounding to me like this Knight Hankey outfit doesn't know what it's doing with judicial bonds in the first place, perhaps complicated by the favorable terms granted Trump.
  13. Elaborating a bit on gator's post, in a normal business Chapter 11, the business carries on, pretty much as normal. With the exception that the business is in Chapter 11 for some sort of business reasons and the operations usually are tailored to address whatever business judgments or conditions got them in Chapter 11 in the first place. So, that can mean people are fired, certain business segments curtailed, etc. What it is not is bankruptcy court imposed austerity, in most cases. So, outside his personal bankruptcy, Jones had businesses and those businesses mostly get to operate "as usual" even if they are crazy, fucked up businesses, especially if they are still throwing off money. The personal Chapter 11 is a different deal, though. And to avoid liquidation, he's going to need to find something substantial. And, I am surprised the court/US Trustee has allowed his profligate spending. The 85M settlement came at a cost to Jones, though, at 8.5M annually, substantially more than he proposes. And, you can be reasonably sure that the 85M is not some generous forgiveness, it's probably a realistic assessment of the cost and benefit of the plaintiffs trying to collect the entire judgment over a reasonable period of time. And, the liquidation in bankruptcy, kind of like executing judgments on assets, is not guaranteed to return more money to the plaintiffs, by any stretch.
  14. Except Trump ain't getting away with much here. And the fact is no middle class person is going to get hit with a 454m judgment.
  15. Yeah, I wasn't all for it and have had quite mixed feelings about it for many reasons.
  16. There's more sane responses on there than I would expect.
  17. https://www.wsj.com/articles/oil-and-gas-companies-seek-esg-loans-pledging-emissions-cuts-11672147496 From a series of similar articles, it appears that O&G is voluntarily implementing ESG measures to attract investment and avoid shareholder backlash. https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/esg-financing-takes-flight-in-north-american-oil-gas-pipeline-sector-65099299 One bank is phasing out upstream lending entirely. https://www.ing.com/Newsroom/News/Press-releases/ING-takes-next-steps-on-energy-financing-after-COP28.htm And it does appear that that is a trend constraining O&G lending. Sounds good to me.
  18. Fun story about me and semicolons. When I was in high school writing essays, I'd get these comments from teachers like "great point say more." I was confused because I thought usually my point was self-evident and did not require elaboration. Later on bearing this in mind, I apparently started crafting dense, complex sentences to pack in more of the requested information. Finally, in my last year of law school in an advanced writing class, Terri LeClercq, truly one of the Texas Law greats, pointed out my complex sentences and suggested that I retreat to very simple sentences and then perhaps combine them with semi colons to increase readability and comprehension and avoid the see spot run problem. Still use to this day. This is mostly a tribute to Dr. LeClercq. https://cla.utexas.edu/english/news/alumna-terri-leclercq-fights-uphill-battle-to-preserve-prisoners-rights
  19. Well in some cases, the crimes are obvious. But at least to a lawdog, what was televised on J6 wasn't necessarily a crime. We know that "incitement to riot or violence" isn't really a thing unless it's pretty explicit.
  20. And that order was unconstitutional almost without doubt and anyone imprisoned under it could commence lengthy litigation to so establish, likely being freed along the way.
  21. The problem with that is that what he did on January 6, alone, is not a crime. You have to know and be able to prove his intention on January 6, which includes all the background activity and run-up to January 6. None of that was on video, but apparently some of it was on audio.
  22. Which variant of e-shifting? My best riding buddy converted his GX to AXS and seems pleased. The engineer in me is intrigued by Transmission. On the other hand, I am currently rocking Deore and quite pleased with it. Unless my bike gets stolen again, I can't see myself adopting any e-shifting, unless it's a Sramano deal, which I do understand works just fine (GX AXS with Shimano cassette).
  23. I'm always pleased, particularly here in my dotage, that my practice involves little to no politics and minimal human misery, pain, and suffering.
×
×
  • Create New...