450bench
Moderator
Posts: 30,854
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation: 2323
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Memphis
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-03-2016 10:32 PM)hsvtiger Wrote: (04-03-2016 10:36 AM)bubbapt Wrote: (04-03-2016 10:19 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:19 PM)juggoman Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:15 PM)fsquid Wrote: We negotiated poorly
From the same person that reviewed a certain contract. That she was appointed a Federal Judge by the current administration says it all!
I thought that contract was Bowen's fault ?
Folks are starting to add two and two.
But, are they getting 4?
hmmm....
(This post was last modified: 04-04-2016 12:27 AM by 450bench.)
|
|
04-04-2016 12:25 AM |
|
UofMemphis
Official MT.org Ambassador of Smack
Posts: 48,832
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 1138
I Root For: Univ of Memphis
Location: Memphis (Berclair)
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-02-2016 09:19 PM)juggoman Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:15 PM)fsquid Wrote: We negotiated poorly
From the same person that reviewed a certain contract. That she was appointed a Federal Judge by the current administration says it all!
what rulings of hers do you disagree with, and why? How long have you been a lawyer?
|
|
04-04-2016 07:42 AM |
|
fsquid
Legend
Posts: 81,513
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 1846
I Root For: Memphis, Queens (NC)
Location: St Johns, FL
|
RE: let me get this straight..
if you play in the dirt, you get dirty.
|
|
04-04-2016 08:39 AM |
|
Brother Bluto
Banned
Posts: 46,059
Joined: Apr 2009
I Root For: Jamammy
Location: writing the check
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-04-2016 07:42 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:19 PM)juggoman Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:15 PM)fsquid Wrote: We negotiated poorly
From the same person that reviewed a certain contract. That she was appointed a Federal Judge by the current administration says it all!
what rulings of hers do you disagree with, and why? How long have you been a lawyer?
I'm gonna need to go stock up on popcorn for this one. We got a few folks on here that really are lawyers. I hope they weigh in
#pagingsalukiandrosstheboss
(This post was last modified: 04-04-2016 08:57 AM by Brother Bluto.)
|
|
04-04-2016 08:57 AM |
|
Tiger46
Hall of Famer
Posts: 24,659
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 316
I Root For: Tigers
Location: Colleyville, TX
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-02-2016 05:19 PM)WESTTNTIGER Wrote: North Carolina will be playing in the final four tonight... but we cant hang our 2008 final four banner.
I say hang it.
|
|
04-04-2016 09:33 AM |
|
salukiblue
Liaison to the Dummies
Posts: 31,099
Joined: Aug 2004
Reputation: 1292
I Root For: Space Mountain
Location: Tennessee
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-04-2016 07:42 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:19 PM)juggoman Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:15 PM)fsquid Wrote: We negotiated poorly
From the same person that reviewed a certain contract. That she was appointed a Federal Judge by the current administration says it all!
what rulings of hers do you disagree with, and why? How long have you been a lawyer?
Rulings?
First, when she was appointed she had never been a judge prior to that, so there wouldn't be any "rulings" (as you call them) to make decisions.
Secondly, she is currently a trial level judge now. She isn't an appellate court judge, so her "rulings" aren't generally available for public inspection.
I do take huge exception to her handling of the Rose case and the fact she, at the outset of the hearing, admitted Rose's ineligibility. Once she did that, the University had no "plan B" by which to argue.
|
|
04-04-2016 09:34 AM |
|
UofMemphis
Official MT.org Ambassador of Smack
Posts: 48,832
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 1138
I Root For: Univ of Memphis
Location: Memphis (Berclair)
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-04-2016 08:57 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote: (04-04-2016 07:42 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:19 PM)juggoman Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:15 PM)fsquid Wrote: We negotiated poorly
From the same person that reviewed a certain contract. That she was appointed a Federal Judge by the current administration says it all!
what rulings of hers do you disagree with, and why? How long have you been a lawyer?
I'm gonna need to go stock up on popcorn for this one. We got a few folks on here that really are lawyers. I hope they weigh in
#pagingsalukiandrosstheboss
was anyone talking to you? didn't think so...
|
|
04-04-2016 09:36 AM |
|
shere khan
Southerner
Posts: 60,895
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 7613
I Root For: Tulane
Location: Teh transfer portal
|
Re: RE: let me get this straight..
(04-04-2016 09:34 AM)salukiblue Wrote: (04-04-2016 07:42 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:19 PM)juggoman Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:15 PM)fsquid Wrote: We negotiated poorly
From the same person that reviewed a certain contract. That she was appointed a Federal Judge by the current administration says it all!
what rulings of hers do you disagree with, and why? How long have you been a lawyer?
Rulings?
First, when she was appointed she had never been a judge prior to that, so there wouldn't be any "rulings" (as you call them) to make decisions.
Secondly, she is currently a trial level judge now. She isn't an appellate court judge, so her "rulings" aren't generally available for public inspection.
I do take huge exception to her handling of the Rose case and the fact she, at the outset of the hearing, admitted Rose's ineligibility. Once she did that, the University had no "plan B" by which to argue.
Not only that, and i dont remember the details but were there not alums that sued the univ, cal, rc etc and the cases were settled out of court days after she told the press they had no grounds for a lawsuit. Imo poor legal representation was the difference between our punishment and what happened at any number of other schools in similar situations.
Not to mention the utter stupidity of pastners contract.
|
|
04-04-2016 09:45 AM |
|
Brother Bluto
Banned
Posts: 46,059
Joined: Apr 2009
I Root For: Jamammy
Location: writing the check
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-04-2016 09:36 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: (04-04-2016 08:57 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote: (04-04-2016 07:42 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:19 PM)juggoman Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:15 PM)fsquid Wrote: We negotiated poorly
From the same person that reviewed a certain contract. That she was appointed a Federal Judge by the current administration says it all!
what rulings of hers do you disagree with, and why? How long have you been a lawyer?
I'm gonna need to go stock up on popcorn for this one. We got a few folks on here that really are lawyers. I hope they weigh in
#pagingsalukiandrosstheboss
was anyone talking to you? didn't think so...
I'll let the legal expert speak for me. Looks like once again your young ass is getting owned
Snicker
|
|
04-04-2016 09:47 AM |
|
fsquid
Legend
Posts: 81,513
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 1846
I Root For: Memphis, Queens (NC)
Location: St Johns, FL
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-04-2016 09:34 AM)salukiblue Wrote: (04-04-2016 07:42 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:19 PM)juggoman Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:15 PM)fsquid Wrote: We negotiated poorly
From the same person that reviewed a certain contract. That she was appointed a Federal Judge by the current administration says it all!
what rulings of hers do you disagree with, and why? How long have you been a lawyer?
Rulings?
First, when she was appointed she had never been a judge prior to that, so there wouldn't be any "rulings" (as you call them) to make decisions.
Secondly, she is currently a trial level judge now. She isn't an appellate court judge, so her "rulings" aren't generally available for public inspection.
I do take huge exception to her handling of the Rose case and the fact she, at the outset of the hearing, admitted Rose's ineligibility. Once she did that, the University had no "plan B" by which to argue.
takes care of that.
|
|
04-04-2016 09:57 AM |
|
Briskbas
Heisman
Posts: 6,840
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 297
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Around
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-04-2016 09:34 AM)salukiblue Wrote: (04-04-2016 07:42 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:19 PM)juggoman Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:15 PM)fsquid Wrote: We negotiated poorly
From the same person that reviewed a certain contract. That she was appointed a Federal Judge by the current administration says it all!
what rulings of hers do you disagree with, and why? How long have you been a lawyer?
Rulings?
First, when she was appointed she had never been a judge prior to that, so there wouldn't be any "rulings" (as you call them) to make decisions.
Secondly, she is currently a trial level judge now. She isn't an appellate court judge, so her "rulings" aren't generally available for public inspection.
I do take huge exception to her handling of the Rose case and the fact she, at the outset of the hearing, admitted Rose's ineligibility. Once she did that, the University had no "plan B" by which to argue.
https://www.tnwd.uscourts.gov/JudgeLipman/
She does have some written opinions available at the link.
There was no real way to argue that Rose was eligible without attacking what the ETS did, and there was no way to do that if Rose was not going to participate in the NCAA inquiry process.
As it is, I don't think anything would have changed if Rose had participated. There was a football player down at Ole Miss who had an entrance exam revoked by the ETS in almost identical circumstances a few years back. Except he cooperated with the inquiry process, claiming that he had hired an attorney who had failed to respond to the ETS when they flagged his test. He maintained throughout the process that he had taken the test. The NCAA still said he was ineligible. However, Ole Miss didn't get any games vacated probably because the guy was a special teams player that only played in 6 games.
It is what it is.
(This post was last modified: 04-04-2016 11:01 AM by Briskbas.)
|
|
04-04-2016 10:59 AM |
|
salukiblue
Liaison to the Dummies
Posts: 31,099
Joined: Aug 2004
Reputation: 1292
I Root For: Space Mountain
Location: Tennessee
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Briskbas Wrote: (04-04-2016 09:34 AM)salukiblue Wrote: (04-04-2016 07:42 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:19 PM)juggoman Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:15 PM)fsquid Wrote: We negotiated poorly
From the same person that reviewed a certain contract. That she was appointed a Federal Judge by the current administration says it all!
what rulings of hers do you disagree with, and why? How long have you been a lawyer?
Rulings?
First, when she was appointed she had never been a judge prior to that, so there wouldn't be any "rulings" (as you call them) to make decisions.
Secondly, she is currently a trial level judge now. She isn't an appellate court judge, so her "rulings" aren't generally available for public inspection.
I do take huge exception to her handling of the Rose case and the fact she, at the outset of the hearing, admitted Rose's ineligibility. Once she did that, the University had no "plan B" by which to argue.
https://www.tnwd.uscourts.gov/JudgeLipman/
She does have some written opinions available at the link.
Yeah, but those are just all preliminary motions...nothing "meaty" that would lend an insight as to philosophical reasoning/leanings like one might do with appellate opinions.
(04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Briskbas Wrote: There was no real way to argue that Rose was eligible without attacking what the ETS did, and there was no way to do that if Rose was not going to participate in the NCAA inquiry process.
As it is, I don't think anything would have changed if Rose had participated. There was a player down at Ole Miss who had an entrance exam revoked by the ETS in almost identical circumstances a few years back. Except he cooperated with the inquiry process, claiming that he had hired an attorney who had failed to respond to the ETS when they flagged his test. He maintained throughout the process that he had taken the test. The NCAA still said he was ineligible. However, Ole Miss didn't get any games vacated probably because the guy was a special teams player that only played in 6 games.
It is what it is.
Oh, it was a losing proposition, especially when they were dead to rights with flying Reggie Rose on the team plane at no cost.
I still just would never admit the underlying charge. Hell, just obfuscate, equivocate and deflect, but don't straight up admit.
|
|
04-04-2016 11:05 AM |
|
RekeHavoc
#DoIt4Dez
Posts: 2,097
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 92
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Memphis
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-04-2016 09:47 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote: (04-04-2016 09:36 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: (04-04-2016 08:57 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote: (04-04-2016 07:42 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:19 PM)juggoman Wrote: From the same person that reviewed a certain contract. That she was appointed a Federal Judge by the current administration says it all!
what rulings of hers do you disagree with, and why? How long have you been a lawyer?
I'm gonna need to go stock up on popcorn for this one. We got a few folks on here that really are lawyers. I hope they weigh in
#pagingsalukiandrosstheboss
was anyone talking to you? didn't think so...
I'll let the legal expert speak for me. Looks like once again your young ass is getting owned
Snicker
Cleanup on aisle 3.
|
|
04-04-2016 12:16 PM |
|
snowtiger
Hall of Flamers
Posts: 33,447
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation: 3730
I Root For: W's!!!
Location: Cascade Volcanic Arc
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-04-2016 11:05 AM)salukiblue Wrote: (04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Briskbas Wrote: (04-04-2016 09:34 AM)salukiblue Wrote: (04-04-2016 07:42 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:19 PM)juggoman Wrote: From the same person that reviewed a certain contract. That she was appointed a Federal Judge by the current administration says it all!
what rulings of hers do you disagree with, and why? How long have you been a lawyer?
Rulings?
First, when she was appointed she had never been a judge prior to that, so there wouldn't be any "rulings" (as you call them) to make decisions.
Secondly, she is currently a trial level judge now. She isn't an appellate court judge, so her "rulings" aren't generally available for public inspection.
I do take huge exception to her handling of the Rose case and the fact she, at the outset of the hearing, admitted Rose's ineligibility. Once she did that, the University had no "plan B" by which to argue.
https://www.tnwd.uscourts.gov/JudgeLipman/
She does have some written opinions available at the link.
Yeah, but those are just all preliminary motions...nothing "meaty" that would lend an insight as to philosophical reasoning/leanings like one might do with appellate opinions.
(04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Briskbas Wrote: There was no real way to argue that Rose was eligible without attacking what the ETS did, and there was no way to do that if Rose was not going to participate in the NCAA inquiry process.
As it is, I don't think anything would have changed if Rose had participated. There was a player down at Ole Miss who had an entrance exam revoked by the ETS in almost identical circumstances a few years back. Except he cooperated with the inquiry process, claiming that he had hired an attorney who had failed to respond to the ETS when they flagged his test. He maintained throughout the process that he had taken the test. The NCAA still said he was ineligible. However, Ole Miss didn't get any games vacated probably because the guy was a special teams player that only played in 6 games.
It is what it is.
Oh, it was a losing proposition, especially when they were dead to rights with flying Reggie Rose on the team plane at no cost.
I still just would never admit the underlying charge. Hell, just obfuscate, equivocate and deflect, but don't straight up admit.
That is how it's done.
The NCAA has no choice if you admit. You are supposed to let them slap you around while you protest your innocence.
Never. Ever. Admit. Never. Ever. throw yourself on the mercy of the NCAA.
Game over.
(This post was last modified: 04-04-2016 12:30 PM by snowtiger.)
|
|
04-04-2016 12:29 PM |
|
Nobody4Prez
All American
Posts: 3,780
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 207
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Rosemary Beach, FL
|
RE: let me get this straight..
Interesting how the NCAA allowed Rose to play in the torny
They wanted his tv ratings but after they made their money they decide to drop the hammer
|
|
04-04-2016 12:54 PM |
|
Brother Bluto
Banned
Posts: 46,059
Joined: Apr 2009
I Root For: Jamammy
Location: writing the check
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-04-2016 12:29 PM)snowtiger Wrote: (04-04-2016 11:05 AM)salukiblue Wrote: (04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Briskbas Wrote: (04-04-2016 09:34 AM)salukiblue Wrote: (04-04-2016 07:42 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: what rulings of hers do you disagree with, and why? How long have you been a lawyer?
Rulings?
First, when she was appointed she had never been a judge prior to that, so there wouldn't be any "rulings" (as you call them) to make decisions.
Secondly, she is currently a trial level judge now. She isn't an appellate court judge, so her "rulings" aren't generally available for public inspection.
I do take huge exception to her handling of the Rose case and the fact she, at the outset of the hearing, admitted Rose's ineligibility. Once she did that, the University had no "plan B" by which to argue.
https://www.tnwd.uscourts.gov/JudgeLipman/
She does have some written opinions available at the link.
Yeah, but those are just all preliminary motions...nothing "meaty" that would lend an insight as to philosophical reasoning/leanings like one might do with appellate opinions.
(04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Briskbas Wrote: There was no real way to argue that Rose was eligible without attacking what the ETS did, and there was no way to do that if Rose was not going to participate in the NCAA inquiry process.
As it is, I don't think anything would have changed if Rose had participated. There was a player down at Ole Miss who had an entrance exam revoked by the ETS in almost identical circumstances a few years back. Except he cooperated with the inquiry process, claiming that he had hired an attorney who had failed to respond to the ETS when they flagged his test. He maintained throughout the process that he had taken the test. The NCAA still said he was ineligible. However, Ole Miss didn't get any games vacated probably because the guy was a special teams player that only played in 6 games.
It is what it is.
Oh, it was a losing proposition, especially when they were dead to rights with flying Reggie Rose on the team plane at no cost.
I still just would never admit the underlying charge. Hell, just obfuscate, equivocate and deflect, but don't straight up admit.
That is how it's done.
The NCAA has no choice if you admit. You are supposed to let them slap you around while you protest your innocence.
Never. Ever. Admit. Never. Ever. throw yourself on the mercy of the NCAA.
Game over.
Your best post ever
Plus 3
|
|
04-04-2016 12:59 PM |
|
Cletus
Hall of Famer
Posts: 20,056
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 2130
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Collierville TN
|
RE: let me get this straight..
(04-04-2016 11:05 AM)salukiblue Wrote: (04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Briskbas Wrote: (04-04-2016 09:34 AM)salukiblue Wrote: (04-04-2016 07:42 AM)UofMemphis Wrote: (04-02-2016 09:19 PM)juggoman Wrote: From the same person that reviewed a certain contract. That she was appointed a Federal Judge by the current administration says it all!
what rulings of hers do you disagree with, and why? How long have you been a lawyer?
Rulings?
First, when she was appointed she had never been a judge prior to that, so there wouldn't be any "rulings" (as you call them) to make decisions.
Secondly, she is currently a trial level judge now. She isn't an appellate court judge, so her "rulings" aren't generally available for public inspection.
I do take huge exception to her handling of the Rose case and the fact she, at the outset of the hearing, admitted Rose's ineligibility. Once she did that, the University had no "plan B" by which to argue.
https://www.tnwd.uscourts.gov/JudgeLipman/
She does have some written opinions available at the link.
Yeah, but those are just all preliminary motions...nothing "meaty" that would lend an insight as to philosophical reasoning/leanings like one might do with appellate opinions.
(04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Briskbas Wrote: There was no real way to argue that Rose was eligible without attacking what the ETS did, and there was no way to do that if Rose was not going to participate in the NCAA inquiry process.
As it is, I don't think anything would have changed if Rose had participated. There was a player down at Ole Miss who had an entrance exam revoked by the ETS in almost identical circumstances a few years back. Except he cooperated with the inquiry process, claiming that he had hired an attorney who had failed to respond to the ETS when they flagged his test. He maintained throughout the process that he had taken the test. The NCAA still said he was ineligible. However, Ole Miss didn't get any games vacated probably because the guy was a special teams player that only played in 6 games.
It is what it is.
Oh, it was a losing proposition, especially when they were dead to rights with flying Reggie Rose on the team plane at no cost.
I still just would never admit the underlying charge. Hell, just obfuscate, equivocate and deflect, but don't straight up admit.
If I remember correctly Reggie Rose had paid for previous game charter flights with his credit card & his card account number was on file.
Someone in the Athletic who was supposed to take care of this paperwork had let some of the flights slip through without charge.
Bam ........... lack of institutional control
Syracuse, North Carolina in Final Four shows NCAA talk of academics is largely lip-service
|
|
04-04-2016 05:20 PM |
|