General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumssoothsayer
(38,601 posts)demtenjeep
(31,997 posts)have seen that several times
soothsayer
(38,601 posts)Stallion
(6,473 posts)Courts don't like to dismiss cases with prejudice unless they find that it is unlikely that the plaintiff can replead the case to state a legitimate cause of action. The general rule is that Plaintiff's can amend their pleadings freely until a trial on the merits
MFM008
(19,803 posts)without actually saying that...............
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)paleotn
(17,876 posts)In effect it means go fuck yourself, Rudy.
MyOwnPeace
(16,917 posts)When a lawsuit is dismissed with prejudice, the court is saying that it has made a final determination on the merits of the case, and that the plaintiff is therefore forbidden from filing another lawsuit based on the same grounds.
OR, as "soothsayer" so eloquently stated, "F-off" and die!
soothsayer
(38,601 posts)MyOwnPeace
(16,917 posts)SheltieLover
(57,073 posts)Karadeniz
(22,461 posts)Scheme to overturn a valid election...
RoadRunner
(4,490 posts)Mike Nelson
(9,942 posts)... for several days. Those kicks must hurt.
Brother Buzz
(36,364 posts)32, 33, 34 losses, now?
Gothmog
(144,890 posts)Raven
(13,877 posts)MyOwnPeace
(16,917 posts)Worth reading over SEVERAL times through the evening - and bringing a bigger smile each time!
(and the hair dye may have reached Rudy's butt-crack by this point!)
(I know - you're pizzed at me for the image! As Junior would say from quarantine: "Suck it up, big boy!" )
malaise
(268,664 posts)Tommymac
(7,263 posts)malaise
(268,664 posts)C_U_L8R
(44,983 posts)This just isn't worth ruining your career over.
Cha
(296,778 posts)MyOwnPeace
(16,917 posts)You're sounding like Spiro Agnew!!!!!
In the United States today, we have more than our share of the nattering nabobs of negativism. They have formed their own 4-H Club - the 'hopeless, hysterical hypochondriacs of history.
But at least we know you're on OUR side!
BobTheSubgenius
(11,558 posts)It should never fade from memory of the historical record. I have a faded memory of him actually saying it. If it isn't TOO faded, my impression of him saying it on the tarmac of an airport is true.
MyOwnPeace
(16,917 posts)is his own connection to the Nixon regime and the fact the he himself was indicted for corruption and forced to resign from office.
MAN, the RepubliCons can come with the "leadership" - can't they?
Gothmog
(144,890 posts)Prof. Hasen is having fun https://electionlawblog.org/?p=118942
The judge just excoriates this suit, which those of us in the field have called ridiculous from the start:
In other words, Plaintiffs ask this Court to disenfranchise almost seven million voters. This Court has been unable to find any case in which a plaintiff has sought such a drastic remedy in the contest of an election, in terms of the sheer volume of votes asked to be invalidated. One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens.
That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence. In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants motions and dismiss Plaintiffs action with prejudice.
In a 37-page opinion, the court concluded:
Defendants motions to dismiss the First Amended Complaint are granted with prejudice. Leave to amend is denied. Among the grounds that could justify a denial of leave to amend are undue delay, bad faith, dilatory motive, prejudice, and futility. Given that: (1) Plaintiffs have already amended once as of right; (2) Plaintiffs seek to amend simply in order to effectively reinstate their initial complaint and claims; and (3) the deadline for counties in Pennsylvania to certify their election results to Secretary Boockvar is November 23, 2020, amendment would unduly delay resolution of the issues. This is especially true because the Court would need to implement a new briefing schedule, conduct a second oral argument, and then decide the issues.
The court had many problems with the complaint, but this goes to the heart of the merits: Granting Plaintiffs requested relief would necessarily require invalidating the ballots of every person who voted in Pennsylvania. Because this Court has no authority to take away the right to vote of even a single person, let alone millions of citizens, it cannot grant Plaintiffs requested relief.
Captain Zero
(6,780 posts)Rudy is such a fucker.
Native
(5,936 posts)Renaissance Man
(669 posts)When a plaintiff fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted, it means that theyve been hit with a 12(b)(6) motion under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
When its this bad, it means that the plaintiff has jack shit to support his lawsuit, and that its immediately dismissed and unworthy of the courts time.
SunSeeker
(51,504 posts)In other words, they are usually granted with leave for the plaintiff to file an amended complaint to try again at stating a valid claim.
Granting it with prejudice on the first go round is unusual and means the plaintiff failed to show how the complaint could be amended to survive a 12(b)(6) motion. In other words, it means the complaint was not worth the paper it was written on.
Unfortunately, this also means the plaintiff can now appeal, because it is basically a final order in the case. Rudy Giuliani, and Trump campaign senior legal adviser Jenna Ellis pointed to the decision as a positive development in their effort to push the case relatively quickly to the U.S. Supreme Court. In a joint statement, they said they would seek an expedited appeal to the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals.https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-constitutions-pennsylvania-87eaf4df86d5f6ccc343c3385c9ba86c
But Rudy is running out of time. PA's counties must certify their results to Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar by Monday, after which she will make her own certification.
Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf will notify the winning candidates electors they should appear to vote in the Capitol on Dec. 14.
https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-constitutions-pennsylvania-87eaf4df86d5f6ccc343c3385c9ba86c
Jon King
(1,910 posts)Trump has sued everyone his entire life and gotten away with it. He and his family have destroyed many contractors, associates, tenants, and workers with lawsuits for generations. Now the law and the world citizens need to take revenge. Destroy his bid to steal the election, then destroy every single business and family member in every legal and financial way.
The Trump family has been a 3 generation scourge on the entire free world. Come Jan 21, the world must take its revenge legally and financially until every last Trump is running to the court house to change their miserable name.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)BobTheSubgenius
(11,558 posts)Is that wrong?