InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[loophole73]

Corp

IDCC and Ericy relied on Rule 54 regarding vacating previous orders in order to settle the case. BanCorp did not deal with dismissals at all and only dealt with appealable verdicts, judgments and consent judgments. The parties intentionally waited for the vacating order to be signed before submitting their respective Dismissal with Prejudice Orders. Any lawyer or jurist that cannot recognize that the Vacating Order was an integral part of the settlement is smoking crack. Judge Lynn knew exactly what was going on and the reasoning behind cleaning up the mess of a previous judge rather than running through a lengthy appeals process. Their is a reason for the Judge using the term "circular" in his questioning because Judge Lynn circled around the end using a case supplied by Nok that she expanded on her own reasoning. All any lawyer can do is practice the law existing at the time of the representation. A lawyer cannot be held liable because a judge circles the existing law and attempts to create new law to justify her desired ruling. Under your theory, every expansion of the law that was later affirmed at the appeals level would constitute negligence on the part of the lawyers losing on that issue. I repeat, the lawyers did not have to make the settlement contingent upon the signing of the vacating order because it was already signed before the final submission of the dismissals. As a practical matter, federal judges are literally parties to every settlement because they have the complete power to comment on the weight of the evidence offered at trial and are very tenacious about reminding the parties at the settlement conferences.

MO
loop