Conti was adamant "not" to settle for any reason from the start.... (can't remember if there was an offer or not)... I gather they will all duke it out to the end......
Conti v Watchtower - Court Denies Watchtower Motion re: Substituting Bond - November 16 court documents in pdf
by jwleaks 102 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
-
-
Scott77
"...The three judges haven't started evaluating the merits of the case itself, which likely will take a few years..." DavePerez Just a question. Since the start of this Watchtower lawsuit, it has been only one and same judge involved to this date? Does the law allow a time frame either party to act like in this instance, fill an appeal? I am asking because courts work with a deadline.
Scott77
-
Band on the Run
There are deadlines but I don't know CA law.
-
144001
After the WTBTS pays certain fees and instructs the trial court to send the record to the appellate court (it has done this), the trial court will file the record in the appellate court. Generally, the appealing party's brief must be filed within 40 days following the filing of the record of the trial court proceedings, in the appellate court.
From what I can see online, the trial court has not yet filed the record in the appellate court (caveat: online records of California courts are not always updated promptly, depending on the court). So the 40 day deadline has not started to run yet.
-
mind blown
As a side note, Rick Simon's did say "the Conti case is THE case of his career so far". (documented on vid and six screams)
He's vested emotionally in this case, then financially.
-
Band on the Run
Only Rick Simons knows his motivations.
Heck, I would rather discuss bond appeals than Conti's case being summarily dismissed. My biggest problem is whether the WT had a legal duty at the time of the incident.
It is clear they had a moral duty at the time of the incident. If the appeals court agrees with Conti, other cases may be brought from the time period. Her jury award was so large it has to entice more lawyers to enter the field.
I don't know how to value the court of public opinion but the WT certainly lost there.
-
jgnat
After the California court of appeals rules, if the WT loses again, they can appeal to the Supreme Court, right?
From what I recall, the Supreme Court may or may not take the appeal, based on whether there are merits to the case that have broader implications. ...for instance, if religions can be sued for matters like this (failure to protect).
-
-
jgnat
The converse applies, too. If the California court of appeals rules in favour of the WTS, Candace can appeal to the Supreme Court.
Again, the Supreme Court may or may not take the appeal.
-
Etude
I know there are people here who could answer the question. Perhaps I posted at a time when no one was looking. So, can someone address the following:
I know nothing about legal matters, so I just wanted to restate what I understood regarding a "settlement". My capture is that once the veredict is handed and the case has been determinied, it is up to the defendant (or perhaps any litigant?) to propose a settlement if any of the following is true:
- The settlement is offered during a period of time between the decision and a point of acceptance or appeal.
- The settlement is presented while an appeal is in progres, which can change the outcome of the original decision.
- The settlement is presented before any or all appeals are exhausted or before the time for filing an appeal is past.
Is that right?