It is not the pleadings that needed to be de novo, but under the act, the finding of fact. I cannot believe that you have also sucumbed to the logical error that Whittmore is guilty of.
Yeah, everybody around here is a legal numbskull but you.
You may not like it, but pleadings matter. That is what the judge adverts from in deciding what is in controversy, and upon what he decides the likihood of prevailing when considering a motion for a preliminary injunction. The practice of law is not a touchie feelie thing. Sometimes noisome little details matter. It is why lawyers are paid the big bucks to attend to them. It is possible that the 11th circuit will look past this all, but unlikely. Then maybe Gibbs will rush to amend his complaint, depending on how the the denial is framed. Meanwhile Terri continues to move along the path to a final exit.