View Single Post
  #122  
Old 12-02-2012, 11:56 PM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 765
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tincon View Post
I believe you may be presenting a False Continuum. While there may surely be some exceptions to the rule here, it is absurd to ascribe them any great significance absent some evidence that oral arguments will carry an unusual weight in these cases.

As I said before, absent some tactical reason for not giving notice (as has been alleged to exist), it is my opinion that it should have been given. It is not however, a significant factor in either case.

Interestingly, the worst case scenario seems to have been achieved in the Richards case, where notice was given (possibly eliminating any theoretical tactical advantage), but the notice was materially deficient (possibly precluding compliance with rule 5.1).

Look all I know is this directly impacts my life. I was born and raised in San Diego but that's not really the point. My Uncles and cousins have been paying N.R.A. dues for most there lives. So I figure when you guys are taking money from my kin, your going to use it right. I'm sure you can argue about this all day. I will tell you this though. This stuff directly impacts my life. I had to drop several of my grappling clients so I could sit in front of a computer losing money largely in part because of this issue past few days. That's money out of my pocket. In ain't right that your taking money admittedly indirectly from my family, agree to do a job, then fail to do part of it. That wastes my time and more importantly that wastes Paul Clements time. Are you going to tell me you hired got Paul Clement up there talking for no reason? Why didn't you waive your oral argument like Mr. Bircht did then? Just retain Paul Clement and apply for cert if your only reason for grabbing hm is to help get a writ through if need be.Come on man. Maybe a regular guy isn't going to sway a court but a guy like Paul Clement. Damn right he can. Now instead of 20 minutes of some of the best oratory in the world being applied to con law he is going to spend half that time talking about some letter that should of been sent years ago. And don't tell me its some tactical deal. What happened is you guys amended you complaint and forgot the case originally was about striking down the law.


Look I am not trying to get into this fight between your groups. Other than Adam Richards who's my bro from college I've never broken bread with any of you. On the other hand, it ain't right for anyone to criticize Neuharth about this. This hasn't been his case for a long time now. I don't know the history as well as most of you guys but for all we know he would have eventually given the state notice. And it certainly ain't right to judge Mr. Peruta. He is not running the show. As for him filing a lawsuit. That is his right as a American. Every man has a right to file his grievances in a court of law. That goes all the way back to trial by combat. No matter how rich or poor has a right to try his hand. At least he is out there trying and my understanding is he was even originally doing the work. He forced a case to the Ninth Circuit that may win. If the 2nd Circuit logic is used then Richards will lose. Peruta may still win. Neumath did that because he had the guts to get out there are fight. He forced the point and made the N.R.A. get involved. The rest is on them.

Look if I am misinterpreting that logo and you just posting on the internet I am sorry. Sounds like everyone involved has made mistakes. Point is you should own up to them instead of trying to use some fancy talk to spin it. I am not working in any national firm and I am sure you could run circles around me in a debate. But come on don't blow smoke.

Last edited by wolfwood; 12-03-2012 at 9:19 AM..