Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 9459302" data-attributes="member: 7023840">Well, I think the killer issue was already identified in the district court's order. The district court apparently told Lanasa, regarding the original complaint (this is the third complaint) that you can't just point to youtube videos.Rule 8 requires that you set forth the claims in short, plain statements, and you can't just say, &quot;Look at all these youtube videos.&quot; The fact that counsel is doubling down at the appellate stage on this is worrying. If you think district courts don't want to wade through your youtube videos, well, they are a lot more forgiving than an appeals court. Honestly, if I was Tenkar's counsel, I would address this in a sentence or two, and point to the order- they were told to provide the statements, they had the chance to correct it (twice) and they did not. I am slightly more interested in how the huge amount of non-record material will be addressed. Sometime you do a motion to strike, but IME most appellate courts hate motion practice. I tend to just note it in the response brief, and say that I don't wish to engage in motion practice, but will not be addressing improper and extra-record evidence, and will instead provide a statement of facts that only uses the record.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 9459302, member: 7023840"] Well, I think the killer issue was already identified in the district court's order. The district court apparently told Lanasa, regarding the [I]original complaint[/I] (this is the third complaint) that you can't just point to youtube videos. Rule 8 requires that you set forth the claims in short, plain statements, and you can't just say, "Look at all these youtube videos." The fact that counsel is doubling down at the appellate stage on this is worrying. If you think district courts don't want to wade through your youtube videos, well, they are a lot more forgiving than an appeals court. Honestly, if I was Tenkar's counsel, I would address this in a sentence or two, and point to the order- they were told to provide the statements, they had the chance to correct it (twice) and they did not. I am slightly more interested in how the huge amount of non-record material will be addressed. Sometime you do a motion to strike, but IME most appellate courts hate motion practice. I tend to just note it in the response brief, and say that I don't wish to engage in motion practice, but will not be addressing improper and extra-record evidence, and will instead provide a statement of facts that only uses the record. [/QUOTE]

Verification