Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old September 28th 09, 11:37 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2009
Posts: 1,132
Default Polgar Motion Denied; CA Case Transferred to Texas

Polgar's motion to disqualify USCF counsel Karl Kronenberger has been
denied by Judge Patel. Judge Patel has transferred the entire civil
case to Judge Cummings in Texas. This is a major good day for the USCF.
  #2   Report Post  
Old September 29th 09, 12:06 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 319
Default Polgar Motion Denied; CA Case Transferred to Texas

On Sep 28, 3:37*pm, MrVidmar wrote:
Polgar's motion to disqualify USCF counsel Karl Kronenberger has been
denied by Judge Patel. *Judge Patel has transferred the entire civil
case to Judge Cummings in Texas. *This is a major good day for the USCF..


I agree that denial of the disqualification motion is good news
(though hardly surprising), but why should the transfer to Texas be
advantageous to one side or the other? Not saying it isn't; I just
don't see why it is.

  #3   Report Post  
Old September 29th 09, 12:18 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2009
Posts: 1,132
Default Polgar Motion Denied; CA Case Transferred to Texas

jkh001 wrote:
On Sep 28, 3:37 pm, MrVidmar wrote:
Polgar's motion to disqualify USCF counsel Karl Kronenberger has been
denied by Judge Patel. Judge Patel has transferred the entire civil
case to Judge Cummings in Texas. This is a major good day for the USCF.


I agree that denial of the disqualification motion is good news
(though hardly surprising), but why should the transfer to Texas be
advantageous to one side or the other? Not saying it isn't; I just
don't see why it is.

IMO, Polgar, Truong and Leigh were expecting a big win and the prospect
of a big payday in California. They withdrew their motion to transfer
the case to Texas when they had a couple of orders go against them in
Texas. Hence, the decision to transfer by Judge Patel was on her own
motion--sua sponte.

I'm told that Judge Patel was critical of the conduct of both counsel,
but spent far more time dressing down Mr. Leigh than Mr. Kronenberger.
Near the end Leigh was apparently so angry that that he had his arms
crossed and was staring at Judge Patel. Judge Patel told him to stop
looking at her like that. Leigh also asked to be permitted to submit
papers on the decision (a motion to reconsider?), but Judge Patel told
him not to file any more paper in her court. We'll have the transcript
in a day or two.
  #4   Report Post  
Old September 29th 09, 12:19 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 114
Default Polgar Motion Denied; CA Case Transferred to Texas

On Sep 28, 6:06*pm, jkh001 wrote:
On Sep 28, 3:37*pm, MrVidmar wrote:

Polgar's motion to disqualify USCF counsel Karl Kronenberger has been
denied by Judge Patel. *Judge Patel has transferred the entire civil
case to Judge Cummings in Texas. *This is a major good day for the USCF.


I agree that denial of the disqualification motion is good news
(though hardly surprising), but why should the transfer to Texas be
advantageous to one side or the other? Not saying it isn't; I just
don't see why it is.


As tactless as it may be, I think the transfer to Texas is
advantageous because I have found Leigh's work considerably more
impressive than Killion's. work.
  #5   Report Post  
Old September 29th 09, 02:42 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 114
Default Polgar Motion Denied; CA Case Transferred to Texas

On Sep 28, 6:18*pm, MrVidmar wrote:
jkh001 wrote:
On Sep 28, 3:37 pm, MrVidmar wrote:
Polgar's motion to disqualify USCF counsel Karl Kronenberger has been
denied by Judge Patel. *Judge Patel has transferred the entire civil
case to Judge Cummings in Texas. *This is a major good day for the USCF.


I agree that denial of the disqualification motion is good news
(though hardly surprising), but why should the transfer to Texas be
advantageous to one side or the other? Not saying it isn't; I just
don't see why it is.


IMO, Polgar, Truong and Leigh were expecting a big win and the prospect
of a big payday in California. *They withdrew their motion to transfer
the case to Texas when they had a couple of orders go against them in
Texas. *Hence, the decision to transfer by Judge Patel was on her own
motion--sua sponte.

I'm told that Judge Patel was critical of the conduct of both counsel,
but spent far more time dressing down Mr. Leigh than Mr. Kronenberger.
Near the end Leigh was apparently so angry that that he had his arms
crossed and was staring at Judge Patel. *Judge Patel told him to stop
looking at her like that. Leigh also asked to be permitted to submit
papers on the decision (a motion to reconsider?), but Judge Patel told
him not to file any more paper in her court. *We'll have the transcript
in a day or two.


Given the number of motions, and the quality, or lack thereof, in some
of them, I was thinking that there was a non-trivial chance that one
party or the other, probably Polar, would be sanctioned. It would
seem as if Judge Patel was able to restrain herself to that extent.
The transcript will be interesting reading, as will Mr. Bogner's
report.

OTOH, the transfer to Texas, sua sponte, just seems a little bizarre.
My practice currently is limited to State court, and I don't recall
all the rules for the transfer of cases among Federal courts, but I am
not sure of the legal basis for ordering such a transfer. If I were
Judge Cummings, I would look for a basis to send the whole mess back
to Judge Patel with a box of chocolates.


  #6   Report Post  
Old September 29th 09, 04:21 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 5
Default Polgar Motion Denied; CA Case Transferred to Texas

OTOH, the transfer to Texas, sua sponte, just seems a little bizarre.
My practice currently is limited to State court, and I don't recall
all the rules for the transfer of cases among Federal courts, but I am
not sure of the legal basis for ordering such a transfer. *If I were
Judge Cummings, I would look for a basis to send the whole mess back
to Judge Patel with a box of chocolates.


Most of my practice was in federal courts, Wick. What I understand to
be the applicable statute is below, particularly subsection (a). I
hedge a bit because PACER is down and I haven't seen Judge Patel's
order.

Sua sponte transfers are rare, but not unheard of. Judges have broad
discretion to transfer, and I'm not really surprised Judge Patel
exercised it just to stop dealing with the mess. I do remember
reading one case where two district judges kept bouncing a patent case
back to one another, and an appellate court had to step in. I suspect
that Judge Cummings will keep this one--just a hunch, but there's
actually very little to stop him from sending the whole mess back to
California if he chose to.

Article III judgeships. Broad discretion, can't get fired. Very
sweet gig.

§ 1404. Change of venue

(a) For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of
justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other
district or division where it might have been brought.

(b) Upon motion, consent or stipulation of all parties, any action,
suit or proceeding of a civil nature or any motion or hearing thereof,
may be transferred, in the discretion of the court, from the division
in which pending to any other division in the same district. Transfer
of proceedings in rem brought by or on behalf of the United States may
be transferred under this section without the consent of the United
States where all other parties request transfer.

(c) A district court may order any civil action to be tried at any
place within the division in which it is pending.

(d) As used in this section, the term “district court” includes the
District Court of Guam, the District Court for the Northern Mariana
Islands, and the District Court of the Virgin Islands, and the term
“district” includes the territorial jurisdiction of each such court.
  #7   Report Post  
Old September 29th 09, 04:24 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2009
Posts: 1,132
Default Polgar Motion Denied; CA Case Transferred to Texas

Brennan Price wrote:
OTOH, the transfer to Texas, sua sponte, just seems a little bizarre.
My practice currently is limited to State court, and I don't recall
all the rules for the transfer of cases among Federal courts, but I am
not sure of the legal basis for ordering such a transfer. If I were
Judge Cummings, I would look for a basis to send the whole mess back
to Judge Patel with a box of chocolates.


Most of my practice was in federal courts, Wick. What I understand to
be the applicable statute is below, particularly subsection (a). I
hedge a bit because PACER is down and I haven't seen Judge Patel's
order.

Sua sponte transfers are rare, but not unheard of. Judges have broad
discretion to transfer, and I'm not really surprised Judge Patel
exercised it just to stop dealing with the mess. I do remember
reading one case where two district judges kept bouncing a patent case
back to one another, and an appellate court had to step in. I suspect
that Judge Cummings will keep this one--just a hunch, but there's
actually very little to stop him from sending the whole mess back to
California if he chose to.

Article III judgeships. Broad discretion, can't get fired. Very
sweet gig.

§ 1404. Change of venue

(a) For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of
justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other
district or division where it might have been brought.

(b) Upon motion, consent or stipulation of all parties, any action,
suit or proceeding of a civil nature or any motion or hearing thereof,
may be transferred, in the discretion of the court, from the division
in which pending to any other division in the same district. Transfer
of proceedings in rem brought by or on behalf of the United States may
be transferred under this section without the consent of the United
States where all other parties request transfer.

(c) A district court may order any civil action to be tried at any
place within the division in which it is pending.

(d) As used in this section, the term “district court” includes the
District Court of Guam, the District Court for the Northern Mariana
Islands, and the District Court of the Virgin Islands, and the term
“district” includes the territorial jurisdiction of each such court.

Maybe Judge Cummings will transfer the entire case to Guam.
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
USCF Makes Anti-SLAPP Motion to Dismiss In CA MrVidmar alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 0 August 25th 09 03:08 AM
The End Draws Near Mr.Vidmar[_2_] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 March 25th 09 01:10 AM
The End Draws Near Mr.Vidmar[_2_] alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 0 March 25th 09 01:10 AM
Bogner Motion to Strike B. Lafferty[_6_] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 0 December 27th 08 04:59 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:13 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017