Jump to content

Sec 8 Defense In A Pretrial Motion Only?


t-pain

Recommended Posts

I just had a law school flashback. :fpc:

 

 

Matt Abel and Michael Kormone could get together and file an extraordinary writ of Superintending Control alleging the Supreme Court should assume "superintending control" over all Oakland County marijuana cases and appoint an independent judicial panel to hear them. THAT would get there attention- and would make all the newspapers. Cockroaches don't like the light. :crazysmile:

 

I LOVE how that sounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just had a law school flashback. :fpc:

 

 

Matt Abel and Michael Kormone could get together and file an extraordinary writ of Superintending Control alleging the Supreme Court should assume "superintending control" over all Oakland County marijuana cases and appoint an independent judicial panel to hear them. THAT would get there attention- and would make all the newspapers. Cockroaches don't like the light. :crazysmile:

 

Is the county itself responsible for what its courts do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope! I says what I say and I mean what I says. :yahoo-wave:

 

Malice in civil libel cases is a high standard requiring actual intent to harm the party by publishing your bullcrap KNOWING it to be false. I say this is "actual malice." These cases are issued with the actual intent of harming the defendants and they must KNOW the reasoning on these are incredibly deficient. The legal interpretation in these cases is beyond poor. These are not just examples of "abuse of discretion." These are cases where judges are CLEARLY letting their personal views get in the way of interpreting the law. There is a story to tell here, I just know it....

 

 

Actual malice is a standard used in defamation cases where the aggrieved party is a public figure. It has no appliation here. I know of no other tort, or any other area of law, where the actual malice standard is applied. Show me otherwise and I'll owe you a coke.,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

If that is not a rhetorical question, the answer is yes, as long as you are a patient. Hell. Even if it is rhetorical the answer is yes.

 

Hummm .. and the acquisition of of the medicine is for the benefit of the treating the condition of the patient. That patient takes off the patient hat and replaces it with a caregiver hat.

 

What was the purpose of the medicine acquired? It was being acquired to transfer to another patient.

 

sigh .. intent ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...