| KC responds on Iqbal | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jun 29 2009, 07:28 AM (978 Views) | |
| MikeZPU | Jul 1 2009, 07:24 PM Post #31 |
|
As we await how much of this civil case will move forward, the one thing that I am sure of is that Nifong will not walk away. There are all those findings of fact compiled by Lane Williamson which are quite damning, and we have the NC AG declaring innocence after a true investigation, and publicly calling Nifong a "rogue prosecutor" (and Hardin calling for a criminal investigation.) Edited by MikeZPU, Jul 1 2009, 07:32 PM.
|
 |
 
|
| sdsgo | Jul 1 2009, 08:09 PM Post #32 |
|
To answer your first question, you simply need to restate it. -- "Did that serve the best interest of As to, "At the worst I fully expect Judge Beaty to allow the Plaintiff's attorney to reformulate their complaints ..." let's take a look at Jamie's statement in that regard. “At this stage, Plaintiffs should not be allowed to file yet another amended complaint to attempt to correct their pleading deficiencies. Iqbal did not create new pleading standards; it confirmed the pleading standards of Rule 8 that the Supreme Court had already articulated in Twombly, which was decided before any of Plaintiffs’ complaints were filed. Furthermore, Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint is already 427 pages long, with 1,384 distinct allegations and 28 exhibits. After multiple tries, it is unlikely that Plaintiffs are capable of inserting any more factual material that would cure the deficiencies in their claims. To allow them to amend their complaint once again, after extensive briefing has already been completed, would be a waste of both the parties’ and the court’s resources.” - Duke Reply (footnote 8 page 6) (Repeated in multiple briefs.) -- "Iqbal did not create new pleading standards;..." Maybe, but they certainly clarified that the Twombly standard applies to all civil pleadings. -- "Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint is already 427 pages long, with 1,384 distinct allegations and 28 exhibits." True -- "After multiple tries, it is unlikely that Plaintiffs are capable of inserting any more factual material that would cure the deficiencies in their claims." Defendants seem to have opened the door for plaintiffs to proffer specific examples in their responses of factual material that would cure such deficiencies. -- "To allow them to amend their complaint once again, after extensive briefing has already been completed, would be a waste of both the parties’ and the court’s resources.” That really depends on the answers to the questions above. "It seems Jamie's filing opens the door for more damning information to come out prior to depositions. Was it a cure which will eventually kill the patient?" -- If her clients told her the truth, she should be in the best position to evaluate the risks. "Personally I believe Duke should have settled the claim ..." -- 20/20 hindsight. |
|
|
|
| sdsgo | Jul 1 2009, 09:13 PM Post #33 |
|
KC said: “Yet Gottlieb—under oath in a deposition to the State Bar—went on record about what he told the grand jury. And what he told the grand jury—that Crystal Mangum’s story was consistent from the time she met with former SANE nurse-in-training Tara Levicy to the time of the arrests—was a lie.” - - - - Gottlieb Deposition, 4/19/2007, Page 185, lines 17 -25: And they asked me about the medical report. I told them that the SANE nurse found the information to be consistent with the story she was giving. I explained to them that there were inconsistencies in the very beginning when she was crying, upset, whatever. But as soon as Nurse Levicy was able to calm her down, which didn't take long at all, she never changed her story from that point. - - - - KC, it would have been a lie if Gottlieb had been referring to the whole time up until the arrests, but the second paragraph in the transcript was from Nurse Levicy’s description of Crystal’s story during the seven hours Crystal was in her care. 
|
|
|
|
| chatham | Jul 1 2009, 09:23 PM Post #34 |
|
If I was Nifong's lawyer I might recommend going in this direction. The judge might see you as mentally ill and crazy and toss nifong's part of the case due to mental incompetence. He must think he is screwed no matter what and the reality of the matter is the client is still the boss. Nifong is gonna do what nifong is gonna do. |
|
|
|
| Baldo | Jul 2 2009, 01:16 AM Post #35 |
|
“At this stage, Plaintiffs should not be allowed to file yet another amended complaint to attempt to correct their pleading deficiencies. Iqbal did not create new pleading standards; it confirmed the pleading standards of Rule 8 that the Supreme Court had already articulated in Twombly, which was decided before any of Plaintiffs’ complaints were filed. Furthermore, Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint is already 427 pages long, with 1,384 distinct allegations and 28 exhibits. After multiple tries, it is unlikely that Plaintiffs are capable of inserting any more factual material that would cure the deficiencies in their claims. To allow them to amend their complaint once again, after extensive briefing has already been completed, would be a waste of both the parties’ and the court’s resources.” - Duke Reply (footnote 8 page 6) (Repeated in multiple briefs.) But Jamie did not give the actual directions of the SCOTUS decision in regards to Iqbal, which is crucial to understanding the factors which will have to be the legal foundation for Judge Beaty's ultimate decision. "The justices sent the case back to the New York-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, which now must decide whether to allow Mr. Iqbal to try to present more evidence to substantiate his claims. Mr. Iqbal's claims against lower-level officials, including guards and supervisors at the detention center, are unaffected by the court's ruling." Tuesday, May 19, 2009 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/18/AR2009051802815.html The claims against Mr. Ashcroft and Mr. Mueller were not dismissed. They were sent back to the 2nd Court of Appeals to decide whether to allow Iqbal to present more evidence in a filing. I agree Iqbal's claims against the US Attorney General and the FBI Director were indeed a stretch because he never made that direct connection to them. It was simply accusatory. HOWEVER, Iqbal's claims against lower level officials were unaffected by the SCOTUS filing. IMHO The miscreants in Durham at the Duke along with Nifong won't escape discovery. There is more than enough direct contact, intentional orders, and proof that the Plaintiff's civil rights were violated intentionally in the lawsuits. The lawsuits already have met that level. We don't know how Judge Beaty will rule, but I doubt he will overreach the decision of the SCOTUS which he would have to if he granted Jamie's filing. Edited by Baldo, Jul 3 2009, 02:10 PM.
|
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |
7:05 PM Nov 24
