Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Entertainment and Pop Culture
Reply to "Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I could be completely wrong about the Berk case being on Liman's mind, freely admit I am not a Liman mind reader. But worth noting that not only was it recently cited by Babcock in opposition to the Texas Rule 47.1 motion for fees, it also issued in early 2026, after the briefing was completed on the 47.1 motion in the NY Case. [/quote] It is a major pet peeve of mine when people put a bunch of empty space in their posts in order to draw more attention to them. Use bold or italics or all caps if you must but don't do that. I fixed it for you. I do not think Berk applies here because the state law is not in direct conflict with the federal rule. In my opinion. I am open to being proven wrong, but if you look at the Berk ruling I don't think it fits. I think Erie doctrine is controlling, though.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
