California Case Update
- Thread starter Shamil
- Start date
- Status
Digital Doctor
Well-known member
Online now: 359 (members: 69, guests: 290)
Not much information unfortunately. Ashley said it was ok to forward this on.
"it has been refered to the Magistrate Judge and they will work up a decision as a 'report and reccomendation' "
From reading that, it sounds like someone who isn't involved with the case is going to be provided with the requests for judgement and the counter arguements and will provide their verdict back to Judge Real, who will either then affirm or deny the recomendations based on his own decision also.
"it has been refered to the Magistrate Judge and they will work up a decision as a 'report and reccomendation' "
From reading that, it sounds like someone who isn't involved with the case is going to be provided with the requests for judgement and the counter arguements and will provide their verdict back to Judge Real, who will either then affirm or deny the recomendations based on his own decision also.
AdamD
Well-known member
Hrm, wonder what that means in laymans terms? hehe
TsinJu
Well-known member
Teapot
Well-known member
Sounds reasonable. I know it's probably far too early to tell, but do we know what sort of timeframe that'd take place in?
No idea, I imagine it would be a fairly quick process. PACER will probably shed more light...
jadmperry
Well-known member
Here is a decent explanation:
"Q: What are the three ways magistrate judges may have more involvement in civil cases, beyond inherent authority?
Civil cases are commonly referred to magistrate judges in two ways, called "A" and "B" referrals, under 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(A) and (B). (See also DUCivR 72-2(b) and (c).) Under an A referral, a magistrate judge may issue orders on all non-dispositive motions, but under a B referral, the magistrate judge conducts all proceedings, issuing orders on all non-dispositive matters and giving the district judge a report and recommendation as to final disposition. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the report and recommendation, and may remand the case to the magistrate judge for further action. The statute treats the following motions as "dispositive":
Hard to say, but I tend to think this is good. Though I am guessing at what happened (and later facts may show me wrong), seems to me Judge Real thinks that perhaps a trial is not warranted- but will let the Magistrate Judge make a report and recommendation.
Time will tell.
"Q: What are the three ways magistrate judges may have more involvement in civil cases, beyond inherent authority?
Civil cases are commonly referred to magistrate judges in two ways, called "A" and "B" referrals, under 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(A) and (B). (See also DUCivR 72-2(b) and (c).) Under an A referral, a magistrate judge may issue orders on all non-dispositive motions, but under a B referral, the magistrate judge conducts all proceedings, issuing orders on all non-dispositive matters and giving the district judge a report and recommendation as to final disposition. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the report and recommendation, and may remand the case to the magistrate judge for further action. The statute treats the following motions as "dispositive":
for injunctive relief, for judgment on the pleadings, for summary judgment, to dismiss or quash an indictment or information made by the defendant, to suppress evidence in a criminal case, to dismiss or to permit maintenance of a class action, to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and to involuntarily dismiss an action."
So, it appears this was a "B" referral.Hard to say, but I tend to think this is good. Though I am guessing at what happened (and later facts may show me wrong), seems to me Judge Real thinks that perhaps a trial is not warranted- but will let the Magistrate Judge make a report and recommendation.
Time will tell.
mikoo
Active member
Morgain
Well-known member
Reads to mme together with info jadmperry gave, that Judge Real is simply being CAREFUL.
Also sounds like he knows exactly what he wants to do but doesn'y want trouble blowing back on him later if he does it. So he's calling in an ally to cover his back and share the pain.
Which suggests he wants to make judgement now on either all, or most of the junk.
Either is good. I think a small trial is slightly better as it gives less scope for appeal. But there's not much of that anyway. So I think he's deciding whether to go for broke and judge now, or else chuck most of it out and keep 5% -10% of it for a show trial.
As always thanks to jadmperry, Slavik Jake and others' patient work on all this.
Lucas
Well-known member
How long does this take?
Adam Howard
Well-known member
I love the show and Castiel is just someone I can relate to in so many ways.Totally off topic but.... your avatar has been bugging the hell outta me.. Know I know why - I'd been seeing that somewhere.. Cas!
Just started watching Supernatural on Netflix.
jadmperry
Well-known member
Not sure you coined the phrase, but it's hilarious, either way.
D.O.A.
Well-known member
****, I used 'coined' completely wrong lol. But yeah I am well and truly beyond the point where I worry about the future of this software. I would have bailed out at least a year ago if that was the case. I have 42,000 people engaged on my forums who are there for our content, other members and their own more than a vbcasino, CMS or some other garbage that side tracks things. I must be the lucky admin, they don't care about updates to the scenery.
Xenforo works; Period. I hope US justice works.
- Status