Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThread re: trump/GOP pathetic attempt to appeal PA dismissal
Link to tweet
See my thread from last night.
Technically what Judge Brann did was grant the defendant's motion to dismiss.
A motion to dismiss is what a defendant brings at the start of a lawsuit to get rid of totally frivolous claims so the court doesn't have to waste time.
1/
It's usually hard to win on a motion to dismiss because courts prefer to see the evidence and decide on the merits.
To win on a motion to dismiss, the lawsuit as filed has to be so fatally defective so that there is no point having a trial or hearing.
2/
Teri Kanefield @Teri_Kanefield
For example, suppose I sue you on the claim that you are ugly and therefore you owe me $1 million dollars.
There are a few problems with that.
The main problem, in legal terms, is that I have failed to state a cause of action.
3/
Teri Kanefield @Teri_Kanefield
So you file a motion to dismiss. The judge looks at my pleadings (my complaint) and says, "Even if what she alleges is true, she is not entitled to relief."
IOW, even if it's true that you are very ugly, I am not entitled to $1 million.
So no point going to trial.
4/
Teri Kanefield @Teri_Kanefield
It's hard to win because courts liberally construe the complaints. All you have to do is allege ANYTHING that entitles you to relief, and you get to move forward.
Sometimes a complaint (the document that kicks off the lawsuit) does have an error, but one that can be fixed.
5/
Teri Kanefield @Teri_Kanefield
In that case, the judge gives you leave to file an amended complaint.
This judge said NOPE, you cannot even file an amended complaint.
That's the "dismissed with prejudice" part. The complaint was so defective he didn't allow for refiling.
That is a FireFireFire(ouch)
6/
Technically what Judge Brann did was grant the defendant's motion to dismiss.
A motion to dismiss is what a defendant brings at the start of a lawsuit to get rid of totally frivolous claims so the court doesn't have to waste time.
1/
It's usually hard to win on a motion to dismiss because courts prefer to see the evidence and decide on the merits.
To win on a motion to dismiss, the lawsuit as filed has to be so fatally defective so that there is no point having a trial or hearing.
2/
Teri Kanefield @Teri_Kanefield
For example, suppose I sue you on the claim that you are ugly and therefore you owe me $1 million dollars.
There are a few problems with that.
The main problem, in legal terms, is that I have failed to state a cause of action.
3/
Teri Kanefield @Teri_Kanefield
So you file a motion to dismiss. The judge looks at my pleadings (my complaint) and says, "Even if what she alleges is true, she is not entitled to relief."
IOW, even if it's true that you are very ugly, I am not entitled to $1 million.
So no point going to trial.
4/
Teri Kanefield @Teri_Kanefield
It's hard to win because courts liberally construe the complaints. All you have to do is allege ANYTHING that entitles you to relief, and you get to move forward.
Sometimes a complaint (the document that kicks off the lawsuit) does have an error, but one that can be fixed.
5/
Teri Kanefield @Teri_Kanefield
In that case, the judge gives you leave to file an amended complaint.
This judge said NOPE, you cannot even file an amended complaint.
That's the "dismissed with prejudice" part. The complaint was so defective he didn't allow for refiling.
That is a FireFireFire(ouch)
6/
Link to tweet
The issue will be: Should the lower court have allowed the case to proceed, or was the lower court correct in throwing the whole thing out and refusing to allow an amended complaint.
The lawyers point to the record and argue about whether the court's ruling was justified.
The lawyers point to the record and argue about whether the court's ruling was justified.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
6 replies, 1076 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (13)
ReplyReply to this post
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Thread re: trump/GOP pathetic attempt to appeal PA dismissal (Original Post)
Roland99
Nov 2020
OP
rzemanfl
(29,570 posts)1. If I recall correctly, they'd already amended the complaint. n/t
Ms. Toad
(34,101 posts)2. Once. They took out some parts they later wishes they hadn't
And we're confused about the process for making a second amendment. The court refused to let them fix their mistake.
rzemanfl
(29,570 posts)3. They have no case and can't amend themselves into having one. n/t
Ms. Toad
(34,101 posts)4. Correct, but in this case,
The court played let's pretend . . . Nope . . . Even if you actually had amended your complaint, it still would have been dismissed.
rzemanfl
(29,570 posts)5. I believe they needed leave of the court to amend. The court said "nope."
I am fine with that.
Ms. Toad
(34,101 posts)6. Correct -
But, as I tried to explain, but the court went one step further and explained that it would not have made any difference.