Calling BGOL Lawyers

[kesq]

I have oral arg in a federal appellate court soon, not my first. I thought I might check and see if any fam attorneys cared to give input as to questions I might hear from the panel, or questions they would ask if they were on the panel. The issue is not that complicated, and shit-talking off the top of your head is just fine, as long as it is relevant to the issue. In fact, that will be the best shit. If no one is interested, no big deal. I'm just checking to see what the wisdom of the crowd may yield.

if you are interested, just say so and I will PM you the basic facts and the issue. If the interest is there, I may just try to do a sanitized version here, but more likely by PM.

TIA.

 

[Philli]

Wow... I have not had the pleasure of doing in oral arguments in federal court. Best of luck.

 

[blakkessence]

Oral Argument in Fed.........
1. Do you have any type of representation or have consulted with one. IN FULL DETAIL FULL DEPTH conversation with one or a few?

Thanks

 

[Atastofu]

I've done some defense work as a paralegal in quite a few military courts....not quite an attorney...... but done helped write quite a few arguments....

 

[playahaitian]

congrats fam you will do great

 

[Gazoo]

I have no experience fam just wanted to wish you the best.

 

[kesq]

Wow... I have not had the pleasure of doing in oral arguments in federal court. Best of luck.

Not much different, just more formal. And arguing an appeal is just arguing a motion with higher stakes. But it's still just a big motion. And thanks.

 

[papi68]

I have oral arg in a federal appellate court soon, not my first. I thought I might check and see if any fam attorneys cared to give input as to questions I might hear from the panel, or questions they would ask if they were on the panel. The issue is not that complicated, and shit-talking off the top of your head is just fine, as long as it is relevant to the issue. In fact, that will be the best shit. If no one is interested, no big deal. I'm just checking to see what the wisdom of the crowd may yield.

if you are interested, just say so and I will PM you the basic facts and the issue. If the interest is there, I may just try to do a sanitized version here, but more likely by PM.

TIA.

Sorry, I can't help you kesq. In ny, once you hit the appellate stage they order mediation to try and get rid of the case. They've been successful with me. What type of matter is it? What's the issue? Which circuit? I'm ny state, Edny, SDNY, edwi, 2nd circuit, us Supreme Court.

 

[papi68]

Shit I have to get admitted into ndny for a wage and hour litigation matter. Keep forgetting

 

[fonzerrillii]

I have oral arg in a federal appellate court soon, not my first. I thought I might check and see if any fam attorneys cared to give input as to questions I might hear from the panel, or questions they would ask if they were on the panel. The issue is not that complicated, and shit-talking off the top of your head is just fine, as long as it is relevant to the issue. In fact, that will be the best shit. If no one is interested, no big deal. I'm just checking to see what the wisdom of the crowd may yield.

if you are interested, just say so and I will PM you the basic facts and the issue. If the interest is there, I may just try to do a sanitized version here, but more likely by PM.

TIA.

Good idea gauging the crowd for ideas.... I've only argued one appeal before the Bap (bankruptcy appealate Panel) fucking hated it. Felt like I was in law school again.

 

[Amajorfucup]

Good luck bro. You'll do fine, What state are you in kesq?

 

[kesq]

I'm in SoCal. Appreciate the support, I will try to do the BGOL summary here to allow participation. Colin warning, but I will try to get to the point quickly.

In 1998 my client heard about a tech startup. Invested 9k. shit was penny stock then, but he took a shot. In 2005 there was a reverse stock split, which at the time resulted in him owning 4% of the company and the company going private.

In 2007, company reps tried to buy his shares for about $400. Client says fuck off, but I want info on what's going on. Company says fuck off, we can't give you any info.

In 2011, he sees one of their machines in a bar. He calls company, says he's a shareholder, requests info. The company says there are only seven shareholders and he ain't one. He shows them stock certificate, they tell him"oops you are, but your shares are worth about $900 now. And we still aint telling you shit.

He digs through various press releases, finds out that they went through a few rounds of financing without telling him, including one in 2011. Company was worth $300,000,000 after 2011 round, but his investment was worth near zero. Now they are worth far more, but his shares are still worthless.

Client sues alleging fraud and non-fraud counts (breach of fiduciary duty) in state court, gets removed to Fed court based on diversity. Dist court dismisses all counts for lack of particularity. Client appeals arguing that only the fraud counts are subject to heightened particularity requirement (rule 9b) and the non-fraud counts are subject only to ordinary notice pleading standards (rule 8a).

My opinion is that the law is way fucking clear that client is right re law, knock yourself out researching if you want but the company couldn't find shit either.

BUT the Ninth Circuit granted us a rare oral argument for some reason, so I'm guessing it is to talk shit to somebody, and that might be me. Which is why I'm putting this out to the best shit takers I know.

There are more details that might matter but i will dish them out as the discussion warrants, if there is one. For now, drop your 2 cents about what some white MFs are gonna sweat a justice seeking brother about.

Peace and thanks.

 

[dwnsouth]

damn


i hope this went well.

 

[papi68]

I'm in SoCal. Appreciate the support, I will try to do the BGOL summary here to allow participation. Colin warning, but I will try to get to the point quickly.

In 1998 my client heard about a tech startup. Invested 9k. shit was penny stock then, but he took a shot. In 2005 there was a reverse stock split, which at the time resulted in him owning 4% of the company and the company going private.

In 2007, company reps tried to buy his shares for about $400. Client says fuck off, but I want info on what's going on. Company says fuck off, we can't give you any info.

In 2011, he sees one of their machines in a bar. He calls company, says he's a shareholder, requests info. The company says there are only seven shareholders and he ain't one. He shows them stock certificate, they tell him"oops you are, but your shares are worth about $900 now. And we still aint telling you shit.

He digs through various press releases, finds out that they went through a few rounds of financing without telling him, including one in 2011. Company was worth $300,000,000 after 2011 round, but his investment was worth near zero. Now they are worth far more, but his shares are still worthless.

Client sues alleging fraud and non-fraud counts (breach of fiduciary duty) in state court, gets removed to Fed court based on diversity. Dist court dismisses all counts for lack of particularity. Client appeals arguing that only the fraud counts are subject to heightened particularity requirement (rule 9b) and the non-fraud counts are subject only to ordinary notice pleading standards (rule 8a).

My opinion is that the law is way fucking clear that client is right re law, knock yourself out researching if you want but the company couldn't find shit either.

BUT the Ninth Circuit granted us a rare oral argument for some reason, so I'm guessing it is to talk shit to somebody, and that might be me. Which is why I'm putting this out to the best shit takers I know.

There are more details that might matter but i will dish them out as the discussion warrants, if there is one. For now, drop your 2 cents about what some white MFs are gonna sweat a justice seeking brother about.

Peace and thanks.

Okay, i don't think that you plead correctly. Unless you didn't give us all of the allegations. First, he could have sued them to open their books. He could've sued because they were squeezing him as a small investor. I started out as a federal securities litigator. The ninth circuit is very liberal; however, if you want me to review the docs and appeal let me know.

Did you move to amend pleadings to restate with particularity? You know the heightened pleading standards in fraud cases. I helped with the billion dollar stock ipo laddering cases a billion years ago. I was good at finding fraud cases but our people don't lose millions of dollars on a stock generally.

What do the other circuits say about the issue of pleading standards? I think your client is correct.

I settled a much smaller but very similar case to this a year or two ago. My client got his initial investment plus all the money he was supposed to get back on the eve of trial.

 

[papi68]

Fifty years later, the Supreme Court added some teeth to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure pleading requirements. In Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), an antitrust case, the Supreme Court articulated a more rigorous standard against which complaints should be judged, requiring "factual enhancement" of conclusory legal allegations. The Court noted that "a plaintiff's obligation to provide the 'grounds' of his 'entitlement to relief' requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id. at 555 (citations omitted). The "[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level, on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true." Id.

The extent of the Court's Twombly holding was not immediately clear, and many argued that this new heightened pleading standard was limited only to the antitrust arena. Others argued that Federal Courts had entered a new era, one which required that the plaintiff show heightened grounds for relief.

On May 18, 2009, in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (U.S. 2009), the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, expressly rejected the argument that the Twombly standard is limited only to antitrust cases. The Court clarified that the heightened pleading standard applies to "all civil actions and proceedings in the United States district courts." Id. at 1953. Even the dissent implicitly recognized that the Twombly pleading standard extends beyond antitrust actions, but would have reached a different conclusion in applying Twombly to the alleged facts in Iqbal. Id. at 1959-60.

It is now clear that Federal Judges ruling upon Rule 12 motions to dismiss must carefully and thoroughly apply the two-pronged Twombly test no matter what causes of action are alleged. Id. at 1953. Under the first Twombly prong, legal conclusions asserting threadbare elements of a cause of action do not suffice as a proper pleading under Rule 8. And under the second prong, a complaint that merely states an inference also does not suffice. Instead, the facts alleged in the complaint must "nudge" the claims "across the line from conceivable to plausible." Id. at 1951-52.

The importance of the Iqbal holding for federal court defendants cannot be overstated. Unlike many other decisions of the Supreme Court, which only apply to certain areas of the law or sets of facts, this decision should affect a defense attorney's initial analysis of every single Federal Court complaint. Together, Iqbal and Twombly provide defense counsel with a powerful tool to attempt to put an end to frivolous claims and poorly plead complaints before their clients are forced to comply with intrusive and expensive discovery requests.

 

[papi68]

Are you familiar with twombley?

 

[kesq]

Yeah papi we went all through Twombley in the district court. We have been litigating this case for several years We are in the apellate court now. No, I did not include all the pleaded causes of action. And for standing reasons, you have to plead a case like this differently than the securities case you referred to and that discussion is too complicated for a bgol thread. Shit is different when the company goes private. See the Carsanaro v Bloodhound Technologies case for more on that, or I will explain it another time.

That said, this case is a rule 9 vs rule 8 case per the lower court ruling, Twombley had been adressed earlier in the case. But I do appreciate you raising the Towbley/Iqbal issue because review here is de novo and will remeber to be prepared to address it at argument based on your suggestion. Thanks. For real.

 

[ViCiouS]

Yeah papi we went all through Twombley in the district court. We have been litigating this case for several years We are in the apellate court now. No, I did not include all the pleaded causes of action. And for standing reasons, you have to plead a case like this differently than the securities case you referred to and that discussion is too complicated for a bgol thread. Shit is different when the company goes private. See the Carsanaro v Bloodhound Technologies case for more on that, or I will explain it another time.

That said, this case is a rule 9 vs rule 8 case per the lower court ruling, Twombley had been adressed earlier in the case. But I do appreciate you raising the Towbley/Iqbal issue because review here is de novo and will remeber to be prepared to address it at argument based on your suggestion. Thanks. For real.

hey - how did your argument turn out?
was there a decision or are you still waiting?

 

[kesq]

hey - how did your argument turn out?
was there a decision or are you still waiting?

After all that they took oral arg off calendar and it was submitted on the briefs, then affirmed the lower court ruling on the rule 9 vs rule 8 issue. So next up is a petition for rehearing. Normally it would be a formality but I think we may have something here. Uphill for sure but so it goes. Thanks for asking.

 

[ViCiouS]

After all that they took oral arg off calendar and it was submitted on the briefs, then affirmed the lower court ruling on the rule 9 vs rule 8 issue. So next up is a petition for rehearing. Normally it would be a formality but I think we may have something here. Uphill for sure but so it goes. Thanks for asking.

Good Luck!

 

[sammyjax]

I can't eem lie

I worked in entertainment for years with lots of famous people

And I think what yall cats do is cool as shit.

I watched suits for a long time just waiting for an excuse to dress like Harvey.