Gailon:
I am not going to speculate beyond my level of competence, even if some might think that I have already done so. But, I will illustrate with a true story.
I few years back I filed a "Freedom of Information Act" case against a Federal agency. My request was denied, if full and for reasons that I considered just plain dumb. That got my attention and I appealed to a higher level. In my appeal I tore apart the reasoning of that agency that had denied my request.
The bottom line: I was given full disclosure of all documents related to the issue that I had raised. In fact, I was given more documents that I had actually requested. I beleive that I was given more than I had requested to punish the agency for refusing a fair request and involving the authorities in a case that could have been settled by simply giving me what I had requested.
O.K. getting to the order of the MN Court in ordering the production of documents and that the be provided, under seal, to the magistrate on MA:
1) The order of the MN Court suggests to me that this was NOT a compromise order that both parties had agreed to accept. Rather it appears to me to be an order of the court that was made without respect to the desire of parties, but on the basis of law.
2) I suspect that both sides won some issues in this order that the other side had not been willing to grant. On this basis, I suspect that both sides lost something that they had not been willing to give up. I do not have a desire to speculate on the specifics of who won and who lost what. It is simply common sense to believe that the court would issue an order that walked a line between what the parties wanted, giving something to each and taking something from each.
3) The ultimate benefit of this order to the respectifve paraties will depend upon what the MA magistrate and the MA court will do with the documents that are provided it. In the end there could be a total loss to either side. Or, there could be a compromise which walked a line between the parties giving something to each, but not the total of what either wanetd.
4) I suspect that the immediate issue in MA will be access to the docuemnts by Gailon and Bob. It should be understood that full access to all documents could be a hollow win for them. They could be given access only under strict conditions of use. IOW they could be ordered not to disclose the content of the docuemnts in any form or manner to anyone. Of course that might be subject to First Amendment challenge. But, such an order could be issued.
5) Regardless of the issue of access, there is another issue that is significant. That issue related to the question as to how the documents are used. The fact that documents exist does not automaticly mean that they will be allowed to be entered as evidence in litigation. If they are so entered, it does not mean that they will in any way be determinative as far as the results of the litigation.
IN SUMMATION: In my opinon the value of the order of the MN Court is unknown at this time. It is simply another step in what may be a very long process.
On another aspect: Negative comments have been made in regard to one of the 3-ABN lawyers and her need to take beginning law 101. I do not agree with that assessment. She knows exactly what she is dong, in my opinion. While the MN law firm may have some lawyers on their staff who are stronger than others, they are all competent. Each works in their area of speciality. When it is needed the law firm can place their strongest lawyers into the mix. In a complex case like this it is to be expected that each side will win some and each side will lose some. The ultimate issue is not what each side wins and loses at this point but the ultimate issue is the final decision. That decision is currently undecided, unknown and cannot be predicted at this point in time.
Author
Topic: What's Happening With the Lawsuit? (Read 126357 times)
