Joined: Feb. 2008
|Quote (Doc Bill @ Sep. 09 2012,11:31)|
|“I’ve asked some really good lawyers and nobody knows the answer,” Becker said. “One lawyer told me it’s as long as he wants to take. It could take a year, two years.”|
Really good lawyers, eh? What, unlike himself or the flacks he normally hangs around with?
Really, really, like, good, lawyers.
I assume the judge could rule against Coppedge with no comment. Simply, "no, go away."
For anyone out there with experience in these kinds of wrongful termination cases, is Coppedge typical?
Yes, the judge could rule against Coppedge with a simple "judgment for defendant."
If the plaintiff or defendant requests a "Statement of Decision," then the judge must prepare a written opinion goign into some detail. Most judges know how to write these to bulletproof them on appeal.
Under California law, the judge must render a decision within 90 days after the case has been submitted.
Reading between the lines in the linked article, Becker has continued to submit post-trial briefs, essentially re-setting the 90 day clock.
I suspect that's why JPL is not filing a response to his latest--they don't want to re-set the clock any more.
The judge also has the power to prohibit further filings. I do not know why the judge has not done so in this case. Most judges I know would have cut Becker off by now and rendered the decision.
DS: "The explantory filter is as robust as the data that is used with it."
David Klinghoffer: ""I'm an IDiot"