En Banc Denied!
08-29-2015, 11:16 AM
#131
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
No dog in this fight, just wanting this thing to get done. Cacti, you seem to have a few sources close to the matter. When do you guys believe Silver will issue her order? Additionally, will the SLI continue on the amended schedule (Sept 29th) even if Silver does not issue her order prior to the start of SLI hearings?
GHOST
GHOST
08-29-2015, 11:41 AM
#132
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
No dog in this fight, just wanting this thing to get done. Cacti, you seem to have a few sources close to the matter. When do you guys believe Silver will issue her order? Additionally, will the SLI continue on the amended schedule (Sept 29th) even if Silver does not issue her order prior to the start of SLI hearings?
GHOST
GHOST
The Arb Panel addressed any delay or impact to the new schedule:
All concerned are well advised to note that strict compliance [with the new schedule] will be required by the Board, unless otherwise agreed by the Parties and approved by the Board; or unless, in the sole judgment of the Board, compelling good cause is shown to justify any further modification. They aren't slowing down, it would seem.
And they addressed any decision Silver may make about who participates and what they may say:
"Whether or not a Merger Committee is required to advocate in favor of adoption of the Nicolau Award, we are not only authorized but obligated, as a result of the provisions of McCaskill-Bond and the language of the Protocol Agreement, to consider and give appropriate weight to all relevant facts and history when determining both an appropriate methodology and when determining whether the resulting integrated seniority list is fair and equitable." They appear pretty confident in their own work.
08-29-2015, 12:01 PM
#133
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
The Arb Panel addressed any delay or impact to the new schedule:
All concerned are well advised to note that strict compliance [with the new schedule] will be required by the Board, unless otherwise agreed by the Parties and approved by the Board; or unless, in the sole judgment of the Board, compelling good cause is shown to justify any further modification. They aren't slowing down, it would seem. You quacks just can't comprehend the 9th's ruling, the nic. is lus list for sli purposes, they just didn't bind the boa to it.
And they addressed any decision Silver may make about who participates and what they may say:
"Whether or not a Merger Committee is required to advocate in favor of adoption of the Nicolau Award, we are not only authorized but obligated, as a result of the provisions of McCaskill-Bond and the language of the Protocol Agreement, to consider and give appropriate weight to all relevant facts and history when determining both an appropriate methodology and when determining whether the resulting integrated seniority list is fair and equitable." They appear pretty confident in their own work.
All concerned are well advised to note that strict compliance [with the new schedule] will be required by the Board, unless otherwise agreed by the Parties and approved by the Board; or unless, in the sole judgment of the Board, compelling good cause is shown to justify any further modification. They aren't slowing down, it would seem. You quacks just can't comprehend the 9th's ruling, the nic. is lus list for sli purposes, they just didn't bind the boa to it.
And they addressed any decision Silver may make about who participates and what they may say:
"Whether or not a Merger Committee is required to advocate in favor of adoption of the Nicolau Award, we are not only authorized but obligated, as a result of the provisions of McCaskill-Bond and the language of the Protocol Agreement, to consider and give appropriate weight to all relevant facts and history when determining both an appropriate methodology and when determining whether the resulting integrated seniority list is fair and equitable." They appear pretty confident in their own work.
08-29-2015, 12:18 PM
#134
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
You seem confident in Silver's desire to corrupt her own court. That would just be stupid. No doubt she can be a surprise, but I don't see her issuing rulings on anyone other than than litigants that showed up at her trial.
We'll see. Get ready to start more lawsuits if you think APA and the Arb Panel are not on the up and up.
The Arb Panel was clear. They got this. And no one is going to interfere with a fair and equitable SLI.
08-29-2015, 12:28 PM
#135
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Judges tend to limit their rulings to the litigants in their court rooms.
You seem confident in Silver's desire to corrupt her own court. That would just be stupid. No doubt she can be a surprise, but I don't see her issuing rulings on anyone other than than litigants that showed up at her trial.
We'll see. Get ready to start more lawsuits if you think APA and the Arb Panel are not on the up and up.
The Arb Panel was clear. They got this. And no one is going to interfere with a fair and equitable SLI.
You seem confident in Silver's desire to corrupt her own court. That would just be stupid. No doubt she can be a surprise, but I don't see her issuing rulings on anyone other than than litigants that showed up at her trial.
We'll see. Get ready to start more lawsuits if you think APA and the Arb Panel are not on the up and up.
The Arb Panel was clear. They got this. And no one is going to interfere with a fair and equitable SLI.
08-29-2015, 12:46 PM
#136
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
You can guess what her ruling will be and its effect, but you have no idea. Did you read it already?
The Arb Panel was clear in their procedural question award... They really don't care what the courts have to say anymore. The SLI is not the court's responsibility. Fair and equitable is the standard.
The Arb Panel has it now. It will be fair and equitable and we will all live happily ever after.
The Arb Panel was clear in their procedural question award... They really don't care what the courts have to say anymore. The SLI is not the court's responsibility. Fair and equitable is the standard.
The Arb Panel has it now. It will be fair and equitable and we will all live happily ever after.
08-29-2015, 01:40 PM
#137
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
You can guess what her ruling will be and its effect, but you have no idea. Did you read it already?
The Arb Panel was clear in their procedural question award... They really don't care what the courts have to say anymore. The SLI is not the court's responsibility. Fair and equitable is the standard.
The Arb Panel has it now. It will be fair and equitable and we will all live happily ever after.
The Arb Panel was clear in their procedural question award... They really don't care what the courts have to say anymore. The SLI is not the court's responsibility. Fair and equitable is the standard.
The Arb Panel has it now. It will be fair and equitable and we will all live happily ever after.
08-29-2015, 01:49 PM
#138
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
Silver would be wise to stick with her jurisdiction.
08-29-2015, 02:04 PM
#139
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
08-29-2015, 02:39 PM
#140
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
The arbs have it. They already have a 98% solution and will publish in due time. All the pomp and circumstance is just part of the necessary process.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
