>Is that the ruling where the latest ruling judge seriously dissed the
>previously ruling judge?
I said: . A
>federal district (trial) court (without precedential force) ruling I heard
>about today--I haven't read it yet--apparently said that some or all of
>this
>is OK. This was by the chief judge of the Southern District of NY (in
>Manhattan), a very influential court. ANother SDNY court came out the other
>way. jks
So I heard, though I still haven't read the opinion. That sort of thing is pretty unprecedented, in my experience. I know of cases where the appeals court pees on the district court, and appellate cases where dissenting judges rage against the majority opinion, but one district judge laying into another judge on his own court, someone he has to live with as an equal, that's new to me.
jks
_________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com