Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Lurking Libertarian

So is your thought that the judge inadvertently indicated he will find for discovery and then the defendant could appeal?


14 posted on 10/06/2009 5:45:55 PM PDT by jafojeffsurf (Return to the Constitution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: jafojeffsurf
So is your thought that the judge inadvertently indicated he will find for discovery and then the defendant could appeal?

Actually, the opposite. In federal court, the normal rule is that the losing party can appeal only when the whole case is over. So an order denying the motion to dismiss and ordering discovery is not appealable-- the case is continuing. I think he may have inadvertently signaled that he is going to dismiss the case, because the plaintiffs could appeal that.

15 posted on 10/06/2009 8:30:54 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson