Flem v. Grosse

I'm inclined to favour (a) too. Granting an in absentia trial is not a precedent I'm too comfortable in setting.
 
I think we need to make a decision on this. We have a majority as it stands on opting for a default, but I'd like to have input from Hile before going forward.
 
He's moderating justice on the case; we can't really do anything unless he properly disappears.
 
Sorry guys. Been extremely busy the last couple of days. I agree with issuing a default ruling in favor of Flem.

I won't be able to do anything on this till sometime this weekend though.
 
It appears that this was never completed. The Court ruled in Flem's favor but did not actually award anything to Flem.

Flem has made an inquiry in the thread and I believe we will need to respond.
 
I do have a problem.

You got involved in the thread when you shouldn't have and express opinions where you shouldn't have. You shouldn't get involved.
 
Can you link to where "i got involved"? I have made no comments in that case other than when I was AG, last on Feb. 26.

What are you talking about? Gaspo is the one who recently made a comment in the civil case he thought was a criminal case. Flem had an open question about the court's ruling. I think we need to address it.
 
And AGs don't make comments in civil cases. You got involved when you shouldn't. I think you should stay out of it. We issues a default ruling in favour of flem and that's that.
 
That actually isn't what hileville stated after Flem's remarks:

The Court will issue an opinion in the coming days.

I am extremely busy IRL right now and not able to write it up at this time. The publishing of the ruling was to let people know what the Court decided last week.
Click to expand...

Thus I think the court needs to respond. If you would like to take a "that's that" approach to flem why not just make that comment in the thread in question and be done with it? Not the approach I'd take, but if that's how you feel...go for it.
 
Actually the last thing Hile said was this.

The previous Court ruled. You have no place interfering in the ruling of a previous Court, especially when you were commenting in the thread when you weren't supposed to.
 
Alright...perhaps I missed that statement. That runs counter to his prior one. I have not and will not comment in that thread. We've been asked to explain, Hile stated he would, and then later stated he wouldn't.

Not what I'd do but it was his show then so I suppose that is that. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top