Bruins v. Blues

TheRealness

Don't make him go all Lucic on your ash
SoSH Member
Feb 8, 2006
10,843
The Dirty Shire
I just want you all to know that I am already drinking. Won a big supreme court argument today. If you work for Met-Life, I will apologize in advance for fucking up your 2019 books.

PAY THE MAN HIS MONEY. LET'S FUCKING GOOOOO
 

Ale Xander

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
21,914
I just want you all to know that I am already drinking. Won a big supreme court argument today. If you work for Met-Life, I will apologize in advance for fucking up your 2019 books.

PAY THE MAN HIS MONEY. LET'S FUCKING GOOOOO
MA or SCOTUS?
 

Myt1

the FRESH maker
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
27,530
South Boston
Myt1 is correct. NH.

And, in front of an extremely conservative, anti-“windfall” NH Supreme Court!

Counts for my client! Thanks. Back to the Crown.
Was the ambiguity argument a make-work one (on appeal, not below), and how long did you spend on it at oral argument?

Also, congratulations!
 

Dummy Hoy

Angry Pissbum
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2006
6,055
Falmouth
I just want you all to know that I am already drinking. Won a big supreme court argument today. If you work for Met-Life, I will apologize in advance for fucking up your 2019 books.

PAY THE MAN HIS MONEY. LET'S FUCKING GOOOOO
Nice work buddy. Drink up.
 

TheRealness

Don't make him go all Lucic on your ash
SoSH Member
Feb 8, 2006
10,843
The Dirty Shire
Was the ambiguity argument a make-work one (on appeal, not below), and how long did you spend on it at oral argument?

Also, congratulations!
We won on all issues below (that it was a reasonable interpretation, it wasn’t in conflict, and at worst was ambiguous. The statutory argument was secondary because we raised it. Supremes decided against us on those issues, then for us on the statute. The author (Hanttz-Marconi) only asked me one question on the statue at oral argument, and asked the same of defense counsel. Guess I was fortunate to thread the needle enough. Spent most of our time at oral argument on ambiguity and condition precedents, not on the statute.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
21,880
306, row 14
Nice balanced attack. ES goals from the 1st, 2nd and 3rd/4th line line change, and the 2nd PP unit chipped in the other goal.