[Maceman]

It is not clear but it seems that the judge is simply saying that the question whether Mann committed fraud in his studies as a question of fact which must be determined by a hearing because it relates to whether or not the defense of truth will avail Marc Steyn and the other defendants. If this is so, there is nothing exceptional about the judge's ruling, however exceptional her grammar may be.

Your own exceptional grammar renders your first sentence incomprehensible. Did you mistakenly type "as" when you meant to type "is"?

The first paragraph of your post could be clearer, also.

Whereas most grammatical errors I see on FR are merely annoying, I'm afraid that your grammar actually obscures your point. True, I am getting on in years and thus have lost numerous brain cells over time. Still, I think it would be worth it for you to rewrite your post because it seems like your point would be useful if only it could be made more clearly.

[nathanbedford]

You are correct the "as" should be rendered, "is." The source of the problem is Dragon NaturallySpeaking software which often confuses "is" for "as" and even more often "his" for "is."

The blame for the problem however belongs to the proofreader.

As to the meaning of the reply, an open question of fact must be determined by the trier of fact but questions of law are resolved by the judge. The judge here is saying that she cannot from the pleadings alone conclusively find that there is no issue of fact concerning the alleged fraud which has been raised by the respondents as a defense. She cannot simply conclude that a fraud was committed, or not committed for that matter, that remains an open question to be decided by a jury or a judge, if sitting without a jury, after a plenary hearing.