InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

Meowza

05/11/20 11:56 AM

#272737 RE: ziploc_1 #272729

Covington could have submitted a somewhat crisper proposed findings of fact. Yes.

It's still hard to take Judge Du's ruling in good faith given the errors of law/procedure. To my understanding Covington still did well enough gathering all the evidence needed for Judge Du to rule correctly. She screwed up, and she seemed resolved to screw up the way they did. All she has to do as judge is make a throwaway "not persuasive enough" statement, while continuing to make all the other errors she made.
icon url

ilovetech

05/11/20 12:10 PM

#272742 RE: ziploc_1 #272729

ziploc_1, on so many levels, this situation rivals medical malpractice. With medical malpractice, there's no "do over". Let's set aside why or how Du came up with her ruling? The board exposed her flaws witin 24 hours. Are we to believe we're more resourceful? IF SHE CARED ABOUT HER WORK PRODUCT, HER REPUTATION, OR HAD THE MINIMUM MORAL CURIOSITY, she would taken in all the post analysis, and see if she can make it right. The courts should impose a 7 day post ruling grace period. Imagine the time and money the system would save. A small change, but HUGE WIN for everyone.

ILT
icon url

Restingzebra

05/11/20 12:59 PM

#272748 RE: ziploc_1 #272729

Agree. And the added fact that the conclusion section in the trial report, which clearly states no SS in APO between groups, was omitted and not mentioned by Du also smells very badly. What better POS than the trial leads