View Single Post
Old April 9, 2013, 07:38 AM   #264
Join Date: October 16, 2012
Posts: 69
"This is actually a quite smart move by Mr. Gura.

It keeps the Woollaed case alive at the CA4 while we wait to see if cert will be granted in Kachalsky. Should cert be granted, the CA4 will have no option but to put the en banc petition on hold pending a decision at the SCOTUS.

As an added bonus, because the case is technically still alive, it removes the CA4 decision from the table. Thereby making the split between CA7 and CA2 all the more real.

As esqappellate would say, "quite brilliant." ""

Al, I couldn't agree more, it was a smart move and it exactly the right one with Kachalsky pending. The petition for rehearing operates to stay the mandate of the ca4 and a court of appeals operates only through its mandate in the case (which means there is no remand until it issues). I am betting that we get good news from the SCT on April 15. If so, the CA4 will likely hold Woollard until a decision in Kachalsky. In the meantime, the mandate is stayed. If the ca4 stubbornly denies rehearing anyhow, then Gura moves for a stay of mandate under Rule 41 and files a hold cert petition. Easy as pie.

Last edited by esqappellate; April 9, 2013 at 07:46 AM.
esqappellate is offline  
Page generated in 0.03319 seconds with 7 queries