Wooble wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 2:46 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2282a
>>
>> Appeal 2282a
>
> I intend, with the support of 2 of {BobTHJ, root, Murphy} to cause the
> panel t
On 10 Dec 2008, at 21:22, comex wrote:
Please retract this.
No. It didn't work.
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 3:45 PM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10 Dec 2008, at 20:37, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> Rule 2124 doesn't explicitly state that the objection must be posted
>> after the announcement of intent.
> I object to all future dependent actions.
Please retract this.
Wooble wrote:
> it does if you can actually preemptively support dependent actions,
> which you probably can't.
Rule 2124 doesn't explicitly state that the objection must be posted
after the announcement of intent.
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Elliott Hird
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10 Dec 2008, at 17:31, Roger Hicks wrote:
Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Elliott Hird
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On 10 Dec 2008, at 17:31, Roger Hicks wrote:
>>>
I (if possible) pre-emptively support any judgment of REMAND or REASSIG
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Elliott Hird
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 10 Dec 2008, at 17:31, Roger Hicks wrote:
>>
>>> I (if possible) pre-emptively support any judgment of REMAND or REASSIGN.
>>
>> nttpf
>
> dhtbttpf
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10 Dec 2008, at 17:31, Roger Hicks wrote:
>
>> I (if possible) pre-emptively support any judgment of REMAND or REASSIGN.
>
> nttpf
dhtbttpf
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Please let me know if there's any further troub
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I intend, with the support of 2 of {BobTHJ, root, Murphy} to cause the
>> panel to judge AFFIRM, accepting the trial judge's arguments as a good
>> faith attempt to resolve the case.
>
> good faith attempt does not apply an
On 10 Dec 2008, at 17:31, Roger Hicks wrote:
I (if possible) pre-emptively support any judgment of REMAND or
REASSIGN.
nttpf
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:15, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 2:46 AM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2282a
>>
>> Appeal 2282a
>
> I in
11 matches
Mail list logo
