For many of us, this is the Trial of the Century. Let's hope and pray it's the first of many.
WTS action on Conti's case 3/27/2013
by mind blown 85 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
gingerbread
WT has hired attorney Robert Schnack to handle the appeal. He is a partner with Jackson Lewis LLP. This company is a major, national law firm that represents corporate clients in cases of workplace law. They represent the management. Their website says that Schnack has "extensive litigation experience in the defense of national religious entities in clergy abuse claims."
This show ain't over...
-
DNCall
Gingerbread: In addition to Mr. Schnack who represented them in the original action, the WTS hired Boudreau and Williams (www.bwlawllp.com). Jon Williams specializes in appellate work. My guess is that he is doing the heavy lifting in the appeal.
-
HappyDad
Whatever the outcome is, the WT is still going to part with millions of dollars. Legal fees in a case like this are not cheap.
HappyDad
-
Joshinaz
They would settle sooner if it was more of a popular subject with the media.
-
Gayle
Even if the WTS' goal to extend this issue, even having to pay additonal interest (1.6M, appx?), gives them more time to collect plenty more money (or hide the money) and at least holds back for awhile a tsunami of additional pedophile lawsuits (who are waiting to see the result of this case). then.
-
Chaserious
I am almost certain there is no tsunami of pedo cases waiting to see what happens here. It seems like a lot of people think that, but I just don't see it. That's not how plaintiffs' lawyers operate, unless there is a case that overturns old law, which is not applicable here. If they have a case, potentially worth millions, they don't sit with their thumbs up their behinds on it. Statutes of limitations get closer or run out, potential witnesses could move away or die, and the plaintiff could decide to jump ship to a different lawyer.
The WT is probably appealing this case because they don't want to pay the judgment, and because this verdict was the first of its kind and they think they have a good chance of getting it overturned by a more academic and dispassionate review by an appeals court. Although there is always the angle that the institutional defendant can try to outlast the individual plaintiff to pressure them to settle, but I don't think they view Conti as someone who will settle on their terms.
-
Quendi
I hope DNCall will clarify something for me. I thought that an appellate court only reviewed a case along with examining further submissions but did not hear any oral arguments. Am I mistaken on this? I had believed that when cases are appealed, oral arguments are only heard by a state or the U.S. Supreme Court. Thanks in advance for explaining the process.
Quendi
-
DNCall
I can only comment on California, but appellate courts do hear oral argument. Each side presents its argument and the panel of three judges can ask questions of the lawyers who present the arguments. Usually these hearings do not last too long. Often they are less than 30 minutes in length.
-
Quendi
Thanks for the explanation, DNCall. I’m much obliged.
Quendi