Humanities desk | ||
---|---|---|
< February 1 | << Jan | February | Mar >> | February 3 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
Won't name names but some of you might find it obvious who this is. Federal district court in eastern Texas, Judge Joe Bob presiding. Plaintiff files a certain bogus suit, case is litigated, Joe Bob decides in plaintiff's favor because he always does in disputes of this type. His decision is overturned on appeal. That's overturned I tell you, binding precedent with a capital B.
Nonetheless, another case comes in that's almost the same, but Joe Bob finds a little detail that's different enough to decide in favor of the plaintiff again. Result: this decision overturned too.
Another one or two of these go by, with the circuit court opinions basically saying "god damn it Joe Bob, we thought we explained this already, decision is reversed AGAIN". They create some new rule to allow defendants to get the venue changed out of Joe Bob's court on the slightest pretext. Joe Bob likes him some plaintiffs, so he finds ways to deny these change of venue motions, and those denials get appealed and overturned too, at least some of the time.
This has been going on for something like 15 years with the same judge. Plaintiffs bend over backwards to get their cases into his court.
Short of the FBI catching plaintiffs bringing suitcases full of cash into Joe Bob's chambers, what kinds of mechanisms exist for dealing with this? You would think Joe Bob might get more enjoyment from being a plaintiff attorney, but he's an Article III judge, appointed for life, and he seems to like it that way.
I'm not seeking legal advice, I'm just an amused but dismayed onlooker to some of these cases, and am wondering if there is really a hole in the system going on here. Thanks all. 2601:648:8202:350:0:0:0:C115 ( talk) 06:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
So, I was really asking if there is a way to say "enough" once a judge has been overturned enough times in a particular area, e.g. the equivalent of a Wikipedia editor getting a topic ban. Judges hear all sorts of cases and idk if this guy has known probs in other than one particular area. He just really really likes a certain interpretation of a particular law, so he is in the habit of overstretching it. 2601:648:8202:350:0:0:0:C115 ( talk) 21:14, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Is there a population chart for West Berlin, excluding East Berlin, between 1945 (or 1949) and 1989? I just need total population, not age or gender demographics. -- Lgriot ( talk) 15:34, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
I am aware of Closure (psychology) , but this mostly is about "closing" a certain period in life, especially after difficulties. **Is there literature** about need for closure about tasks? For example I notice that if I (or others I talked with) have too many tasks open and we never finish a good chunk of those, the mental health gets affected, as if one feels unable to complete anything. Edit: it seems that people took this as mental issue, now it doesn't feel like it. I mean rather something in the direction of "closing/completing tasks helps the mood, having too many open doesn't". -- Pier4r ( talk) 15:46, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Humanities desk | ||
---|---|---|
< February 1 | << Jan | February | Mar >> | February 3 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
Won't name names but some of you might find it obvious who this is. Federal district court in eastern Texas, Judge Joe Bob presiding. Plaintiff files a certain bogus suit, case is litigated, Joe Bob decides in plaintiff's favor because he always does in disputes of this type. His decision is overturned on appeal. That's overturned I tell you, binding precedent with a capital B.
Nonetheless, another case comes in that's almost the same, but Joe Bob finds a little detail that's different enough to decide in favor of the plaintiff again. Result: this decision overturned too.
Another one or two of these go by, with the circuit court opinions basically saying "god damn it Joe Bob, we thought we explained this already, decision is reversed AGAIN". They create some new rule to allow defendants to get the venue changed out of Joe Bob's court on the slightest pretext. Joe Bob likes him some plaintiffs, so he finds ways to deny these change of venue motions, and those denials get appealed and overturned too, at least some of the time.
This has been going on for something like 15 years with the same judge. Plaintiffs bend over backwards to get their cases into his court.
Short of the FBI catching plaintiffs bringing suitcases full of cash into Joe Bob's chambers, what kinds of mechanisms exist for dealing with this? You would think Joe Bob might get more enjoyment from being a plaintiff attorney, but he's an Article III judge, appointed for life, and he seems to like it that way.
I'm not seeking legal advice, I'm just an amused but dismayed onlooker to some of these cases, and am wondering if there is really a hole in the system going on here. Thanks all. 2601:648:8202:350:0:0:0:C115 ( talk) 06:00, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
So, I was really asking if there is a way to say "enough" once a judge has been overturned enough times in a particular area, e.g. the equivalent of a Wikipedia editor getting a topic ban. Judges hear all sorts of cases and idk if this guy has known probs in other than one particular area. He just really really likes a certain interpretation of a particular law, so he is in the habit of overstretching it. 2601:648:8202:350:0:0:0:C115 ( talk) 21:14, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Is there a population chart for West Berlin, excluding East Berlin, between 1945 (or 1949) and 1989? I just need total population, not age or gender demographics. -- Lgriot ( talk) 15:34, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
I am aware of Closure (psychology) , but this mostly is about "closing" a certain period in life, especially after difficulties. **Is there literature** about need for closure about tasks? For example I notice that if I (or others I talked with) have too many tasks open and we never finish a good chunk of those, the mental health gets affected, as if one feels unable to complete anything. Edit: it seems that people took this as mental issue, now it doesn't feel like it. I mean rather something in the direction of "closing/completing tasks helps the mood, having too many open doesn't". -- Pier4r ( talk) 15:46, 2 February 2022 (UTC)