I wrote:
> I intend, with 2 support, to appeal. The arguments indicate that
> the transfer failed, but the statement is "ais523 owns a Dunce Cap
> card" which should have been judged TRUE. I recommend REASSIGN,
> as coppro presumably just mis-remembered the statement as "ais523
> transferred a D
ais523 wrote:
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 07:30 -0400, comex wrote:
Wait, what? Why not REMAND?
Because the case was originally assigned to Pavitra by mistake.
I was the judge at the time of the assignment; I don't believe I would
not therefore be the prior judge.
-coppro
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 07:30 -0400, comex wrote:
> Wait, what? Why not REMAND?
Because the case was originally assigned to Pavitra by mistake.
--
ais523
Wait, what? Why not REMAND?
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 16, 2009, at 5:26 AM, ais523
wrote:
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 11:20 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
2009/9/16 Ed Murphy :
coppro wrote:
I assign myself as judge to CFJ 2679, and I judge it FALSE.
I intend, with 2 support, to appeal.
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 11:20 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
> 2009/9/16 Ed Murphy :
> > coppro wrote:
> >
> >> I assign myself as judge to CFJ 2679, and I judge it FALSE.
> >
> > I intend, with 2 support, to appeal. The arguments indicate that
> > the transfer failed, but the statement is "ais523 ow
5 matches
Mail list logo
