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

To: Lurking Libertarian

You either have not read the brief or you do not understand Rule 12(b)(6). Rule 12(b)(6) is different from Rule 12(b)(1) in that it does go to the merits, as the Supreme Court has pointed out, and says that on the merits a claim is not sufficiently made out, oh lurking liberi.


41 posted on 01/07/2010 7:26:52 PM PST by AmericanVictory (Should we be more like them or they more like we used to be?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]


To: AmericanVictory
You either have not read the brief or you do not understand Rule 12(b)(6). Rule 12(b)(6) is different from Rule 12(b)(1) in that it does go to the merits, as the Supreme Court has pointed out, and says that on the merits a claim is not sufficiently made out, oh lurking liberi.

I know that well. But the brief is still wrong in claiming the defendants had to cross-appeal.

42 posted on 01/08/2010 10:00:01 AM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | 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