4/14/2023 0 Comments Supreme courtship book review![]() For this post, however, I want to focus on Pierce’s 71 page opening statement of facts to the 9th Circuit, which refers extensively to the relationship between Anna and J. ![]() More on Pierce’s answers to these questions later. Whether the District Court erred in basing its judgment (including compensatory and punitive damages) on speculative inferences and conjecture, nonexistent or insufficient evidence, and presumed facts.Howard’s principal estate planning instrument to be invalid, in part, on the hearsay statements of witnesses who did not testify and were not subjected to cross-examination, and by improperly handing over to Vickie all of Pierce’s documents, including privileged documents. Whether the District Court denied Pierce due process of law by refusing to permit him to call percipient witnesses, by substituting its judgment for that of the Texas judge and jury through collateral review of the Texas probate proceedings, by finding J.Whether Texas law recognizes Vickie’s alleged cause of action of “tortious interference” with an “expectancy of an inter vivos gift” and, if so, what are the elements and parameters of her novel cause of action and has Vickie met those elements.Howard did not intend to give Vickie any gift, precluded the District Court’s judgment on grounds of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, and the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Whether the Probate Court’s prior final judgment holding, among other things, that J.There, in addition to Pierce’s now discredited challenge based on the so-called “probate exception” to federal court jurisdiction, Pierce raised the following issues on appeal: Given the US Supreme Court’s remand of the case “for further proceedings consistent with this opinion,” rest assured that Anna’s and Pierce’s respective legal teams are dusting off their arguments to the 9th Circuit from three years ago. (Sorry, only We$tlaw version available at present). Part II of our continuing post-mortem analysis of the US Supreme Court’s anti-climactic 9-0 ruling takes a look at the other grounds for reversal argued by Pierce Marshall in his brief to the 9th Circuit.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |