So I just submitted my brief to the Court of Appeals on the issue of a union's waiver through a collective bargaining agreement, of an individual's discrimination claim. Wouldn't you know that less than one week later, the United States Supreme Court granted argument on the same exact issue. Most likely, the NY court will delay its decision until the Supreme Court rules, and then adopt that same exact holding.
I spoke to the lawyer who will be arguing the case and, while he seems to be a nice enough guy, he does not understand the legal arguments at play half as well as I do. He also believes that he's not going to win, while I think there's no shot of him losing. Even the defendant's attorney's don't seem to understand the issues, making arguments that the Eleventh Circuit specifically rejected.
Which leads me to the following conclusion: I know this issue better than anyone else in the entire country. As Lord Chamberlain said in The Dark Crystal, "It should be me."
12 comments:
"ME!, ME!, ME!"
"MINE!, MINE!, MINE!"
-Stewie, Family Guy
I wish I knew what "granted argument" meant. So they decided to talk about it?
"Granted cert[iorari]," Andrew.
Also, "attorneys"! Gaaaawwwd!
Also also, why does an 11th Cir. opinion matter in the 2d?
Peer pressure, Irene. Peer pressure.
Yeah, I've been hoping peer pressure would get you to pay more attention to your errant commas...
Seems like that hasn't worked, either.
I give up on his grammar (no, it's not spelled grammer). You should've been there for the argument over when to use a comma before "too." LOL
Just like a former president famously once said, Nil, I feel your pain.
My blog, my punctuation. Maybe you should start your own blog, about grammar. Yeah, that sounds great!
Also, I, of course, meant to write "apostrophes" instead of "commas."
Sigh. I'm not a native speaker, y'all!
Would be the best blog about grammar EVAR!!!
So eat it!!
I said eat it!!
Wowzers- that's sucky. I remember seeing Vincent Bugliosi speak at Penn State about how having and projecting the confidence you're gonna win is like imperative when arguing a case. Seems pretty basic.
COREY!!
I was with you at that lecture. I think Brian understands the difference between projecting confidence and objectively understanding your likelihood of winning. But he is a dumbass...
Post a Comment