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

To: Petronski
But everyone knew after the FIRST hearing that the JUDGE had NOT heard it as a DE NOVO case. IT was obvious. The 11th circuit did not remand the case back to Whittemore or REVERSE his decision because the lawyers failed to argue that point???????

Wouldn't that have been a procedural error, for Judge Whittemore NOT to have heard it as DE NOVO, and shouldn't the 11th circuit have picked that up???

286 posted on 03/29/2005 10:25:42 PM PST by TAdams8591 (Evil succeeds when good men don't do enough!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies ]


To: TAdams8591
Wouldn't that have been a procedural error, for Judge Whittemore NOT to have heard it as DE NOVO, and shouldn't the 11th circuit have picked that up???

Not if it wasn't presented to them.

The original ruling was on the issue of whether an order to reconnect should be issued in a circumstance where the party asking for it is unlikely to win at trail. Whittemore said, "no", and the appellate courts agreed. Absent the reconnect order, a de novo hearing would have been moot. Here you have the question of whether Congress can, in effect, create a circumstance where he HAS to enter a reconnect order. I'm not going to make a prediction on their decision, but I'll note that an order would be unlikely to issue, in any case, until a decision has been reached. Given the circumstances, issuing an order would be, at least temporarily, the same as deciding the case.

Two days ago would have better for this.

377 posted on 03/29/2005 10:41:21 PM PST by ArmstedFragg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 286 | 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