[conspire] Legal amusements

[Deirdre Saoirse Moen]

In addition to reading science papers, I also like to read legal pleadings. They tend to be rather dry, but judicial humor can sometimes be *amazing* (though, sadly, few are as out there as Samuel B. Kent [1]).

I was having a look on the cases still outstanding, and came across this Nevada case:

https://www.democracydocket.com/state/nevada/?by_case_type=active-cases <https://www.democracydocket.com/state/nevada/?by_case_type=active-cases>

At the end of the first paragraph of the opposition to Discovery motion is this gem:

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/20OC00163-Def-Opp-to-Ex-Parte-1.pdf <https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/20OC00163-Def-Opp-to-Ex-Parte-1.pdf>

“If Contestants [Republicans] want a license to go fishing this holiday week, they should ask the Department of Wildlife, not this Court.”

After a good chuckle, I decided to see what else the defense filed, and the other was a Motion to Dismiss:

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/201123-Defs-Motiont-to-Dismiss-FILED.pdf <https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/201123-Defs-Motiont-to-Dismiss-FILED.pdf>

So, while modern courts blend the two concepts, which leads to significant confusion for some people about the law, historically, one could bring a suit for either law or equity. What defenses you can bring *to this day* depends on whether one’s asked for law or equity, even though it may not be so obvious which is which at times if you don’t know the history.

Requests for injunctions are an equity claim.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_(law) <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_(law)>

One of the standard defenses is the doctrine of laches, meaning: did they delay bringing the suit unreasonably so that an equitable remedy is not possible?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laches_(equity) <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laches_(equity)>

But in motions and rulings, you don’t see laches come up so frequently *as specifically referenced*. Like the recent Pennsylvania judge's smackdown on Trump’s lawyers:

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Order-Granting-MTD.pdf <https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Order-Granting-MTD.pdf>

Back to the Nevada Motion to Dismiss, it alleges a couple of things:

1. Privity, another term I don’t see like ever, but basically: these parties are so close to the same that party A losing over there precludes party B from bringing it up over here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privity#US_federal_law <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privity#US_federal_law>

2. Laches, aka undue delay, starting on p. 13.


[1] Kent’s masterwork: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/147/668/2409194/ <https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/147/668/2409194/>
also amusing: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/39/1008/2286216/ <https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/39/1008/2286216/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/conspire/attachments/20201127/8ff11525/attachment.html>