Todays case is still listed on the court schedule?

[guest]

I doubt it. When they moved it to next week, the lazy fucks just probably never bothered removing the original date from the system, so the website is treating it as if it's happening when it isn't.

Then what about the mini minutes shit?

 

[guest]

Think we missed it tbh

Don't think so. I jumped in at around 10AM PST and didn't see it, so unless it was pretty much the first one, we didn't miss it. This one is going to be a long one too.

 

[Clint Ruin]

Then what about the mini minutes shit?

There's nothing there. No reason to think it's anything other than a blank filler entry for a court appearance that didn't happen.

 

[FranksWirecutters]

I like this judge. He's going to bitch slap Brinton and the fat guy.

 

[guest]

I sent a text to Pena asking him to confirm and he simply replied..."Get money, fuck bitches."


What a stud...

 

[guest]

The court ruled on its own, basically it is on the calendar as a record of the decision. So the decision was still made today, but the court made it on its own, so no parties had to appear. The notes lay this out pretty well actually, in comparison to whatever the fuck Wisconsin puts on the website.

 

[guest]

It didn't happen today. Go to the case calendar here: [URL]https://webapps.sftc.org/cc/CaseCalendar.dll?=&SessionID=7A2739EB93EC04B2337BB3C8652F997E892D33DA[/URL]

Then click on some of the other cases. Many of them also have the blank "Mini Minutes", and if you click on their individual case calendars, they were also delayed.

 

[Clint Ruin]

The court ruled on its own, basically it is on the calendar as a record of the decision. So the decision was still made today, but the court made it on its own, so no parties had to appear. The notes lay this out pretty well actually, in comparison to whatever the fuck Wisconsin puts on the website.


View attachment 7408

Someone is going to be extra crotchety in a week.

 

[guest]

The court ruled on its own, basically it is on the calendar as a record of the decision. So the decision was still made today, but the court made it on its own, so no parties had to appear. The notes lay this out pretty well actually, in comparison to whatever the fuck Wisconsin puts on the website.


View attachment 7408

Oh, so then what happens on Sept 30? Do we know if their tentative ruling includes Fatty paying Quashi's legal fees?

 

[RobertMewler]

The court ruled on its own, basically it is on the calendar as a record of the decision. So the decision was still made today, but the court made it on its own, so no parties had to appear. The notes lay this out pretty well actually, in comparison to whatever the fuck Wisconsin puts on the website.


View attachment 7408

So does this mean Schulman followed Stein's recommendation that the subpoena request be quashed? That was Stein's feeling the last time we heard from him.

If that's true, the hearing will be the delightful sounds of Pig's lawyer getting bitch-slapped around and Pig being told to pay Quasi (hopefully with added on penalties!). Schulman is MEAN!!!

Schulman is what we in the bull riding community like to call "a rank bull".

 

[Covid19]

Oh, so then what happens on Sept 30? Do we know if their tentative ruling includes Fatty paying Quashi's legal fees?

Judge Stein said last time he was going to recommend to rule in favor of Quasi

 

[guest]

Oh, so then what happens on Sept 30? Do we know if their tentative ruling includes Fatty paying Quashi's legal fees?

So does this mean Schulman followed Stein's recommendation that the subpoena request be quashed? That was Stein's feeling the last time we heard from him.

They usually publish the tentative rulings here check under law and motion:
[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.sfsuperiorcourt.org/online-services[/URL]

But this ruling was about the continuance by the court. So I don't know if it means this ruling or the tentative one given by Stein to Schulman.

I'm not a lawyer, so I have no idea. You can see some of the other rulings there from today.

 

[Pringle Can Lothario]

A friendly reminder that Fatrick can fuck himself.

 

[Clint Ruin]

So does this mean Schulman followed Stein's recommendation that the subpoena request be quashed? That was Stein's feeling the last time we heard from him.

If that's true, the hearing will be the delightful sounds of Pig's lawyer getting bitch-slapped around and Pig being told to pay Quasi (hopefully with added on penalties!). Schulman is MEAN!!!

Schulman is what we in the bull riding community like to call "a rank bull".

I don't see how it could mean anything else. What Resto had wasn't good enough, and when asked for more, he just resubmitted the same shit over again. My Lord and Savior and all around good dude, Chad Pena, counterpunched every argument with evidence and legal precedent. If I'm Rick, right now I don't feel optimistic about anything, and I'm also really fucking fat. They got their dicks kicked in, broadcast and recorded for posterity.

 

[guest]

They usually publish the tentative rulings here check under law and motion:
[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.sfsuperiorcourt.org/online-services[/URL]

But this ruling was about the continuance by the court. So I don't know if it means this ruling or the tentative one given by Stein to Schulman.

I'm not a lawyer, so I have no idea. You can see some of the other rulings there from today.
View attachment 7410

This is all I see on the tentative rulings, are we sure they didn't just delay it? If so how do we know whether legal fees were awarded?

 

[Clint Ruin]

If so how do we know whether legal fees were awarded?

I'm sure all that is coming on the 30th. From what the lovely young gentleman who is very clearly not a lawyer said, this just states that they made a tentative ruling, I imagine next week will be them elaborating on what that ruling was to the lawyers and Rick.

I personally take it to mean that they were originally going to go over the filings from Pena and Resto since the last hearing, but then took a cursory glance and decided it wasn't even worth a full hearing, so just made their decision without listening to any more of resto's drivel, scheduling it next week so the lawyers know not to even bother showing up with further arguments.

 

[guest]

This is all I see on the tentative rulings, are we sure they didn't just delay it? If so how do we know whether legal fees were awarded?

View attachment 7412

It has been delayed for sure, but I wasn't being clear because there are two tentative rulings here.

1. The tentative ruling as of 9-22-21 to delay (continue) this hearing to the 30th.
2. The tentative ruling on the quash sent from Stein to Schulman (which wasn't published so we don't know what it says)

It appears that the ruling here is just saying that number 1 is adopted. It is continued. Where it could be confusing is that the court could mean it adopted number 2 and this shifts the burden of proof based on the tentative ruling.

As "Pat" likes to say. It is moot anyway since both parties will appear on the 30th but it affects how the arguments will go on that date.

 

[guest]

say ruling again stupid.

 

[Cptbaldopie]

So does this mean Schulman followed Stein's recommendation that the subpoena request be quashed? That was Stein's feeling the last time we heard from him.

If that's true, the hearing will be the delightful sounds of Pig's lawyer getting bitch-slapped around and Pig being told to pay Quasi (hopefully with added on penalties!). Schulman is MEAN!!!

Schulman is what we in the bull riding community like to call "a rank bull".

I thought a rank bull was Nikki boyfriend after a week without a shower?

 

[AntSucks]

It has been delayed for sure, but I wasn't being clear because there are two tentative rulings here.

1. The tentative ruling as of 9-22-21 to delay (continue) this hearing to the 30th.
2. The tentative ruling on the quash sent from Stein to Schulman (which wasn't published so we don't know what it says)

It appears that the ruling here is just saying that number 1 is adopted. It is continued. Where it could be confusing is that the court could mean it adopted number 2 and this shifts the burden of proof based on the tentative ruling.

As "Pat" likes to say. It is moot anyway since both parties will appear on the 30th but it affects how the arguments will go on that date.

Can you dumb it down a little more? Fatty pay, or Fatty no pay?