Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Nephi

So, in your view, the ex parte applies even absent a single shred of evidence that the court case was discussed?

Again, I’m not a lawyer, just a regular guy, but doesn’t the case need to come up for the ex parte to apply?


59 posted on 01/28/2009 9:49:55 AM PST by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]


To: dmz

give it up, already.
you are wrong.

they only met on the implicit presumption that
the case against the defendant (obama) would be thrown.
they laughed joked. probably raises were promised
indirectly. then the defendant won.


62 posted on 01/28/2009 9:56:40 AM PST by Diogenesis (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]

To: dmz
My view is based on the law and legal definition of ex parte:

Ex parte contact occurs when an attorney communicates with another party outside the presence of that party's attorney. Ex parte contact also describes a judge who communicates with one party to a lawsuit to the exclusion of the other party or parties, or a judge who initiates discussions about a case with disinterested third parties. Canon 3(A)(4) of the American Bar Association (ABA) Model Code of Judicial Conduct discourages judges from such ex parte communications. Under rule 4.2 of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Responsibility, a lawyer should refrain from contacting a party who the lawyer knows is represented by another attorney, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other attorney or is authorized by law to do so.

64 posted on 01/28/2009 10:00:02 AM PST by Nephi (Like the failed promise of Fascism, masquerading as Capitalism? You're gonna love Marxism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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