Reply With QuoteThe state of California uses that term on its small claims help pages. Sometimes English does not have an equivalent term. What is the English substitute for "subpoena?"
Sent from my GtabComb using HowardForums
|
|
|
|
|
Post Machine
Not a criticism, but a question, why use Latin when what you were trying to say was "anew" or "starting over"? It's just that Latin is usually reserved for times that demand no ambiguity.Originally Posted by efparri
Post Machine
The state of California uses that term on its small claims help pages. Sometimes English does not have an equivalent term. What is the English substitute for "subpoena?"
Sent from my GtabComb using HowardForums
Earl F. Parrish
Post Machine
Well done, I made de novo bold and you went with (subpoena) a diversion for the win!
While subpoena is an ugly term for a lot of people, they kinda get it, de novo they may not. Whatever.
I've got more phones than fingers
Did you coin this yourself? Whatever, it is excellent and I hope it spreads everywhere. Cant you just see CBS "Today, the president's spokeshole..."
I've got more phones than fingers
No, there may be other times: a wine and cheese party, a movie review, or sex with a classics scholar.
I've got more phones than fingers
Summons? And "calling" is such a nicer word than "under punishment"
Post Machine
OH no, you had to go there, subpoena v summons, let the games begin!
I summons you to a day in court, and the court of jesters subpoena your uncle Harry (*duces tecum) as to why this thread is still going.
*Off topic whammed!
Post Machine
"Summons" are used to compel a defendant to appear in court. "Subpoenas" are issued to compel witnesses to appear in court. Defendants are never isssued subpoenas except as witnesses against others. This comes from the Constitutional prohibition of compelling persons to testify against themselves. "Calling" has too many ambiguities to use in law.
I have a blue tooth
AT&T is appealing (according to this article).
http://www.pcworld.com/article/25072...ling_case.html
AT&T... your world, throttled.
I've climbed a cellphone tower
The Superior Court in California runs small claims courts in the state. So the appeal is filed with the same small claims clerk.
Quoting from: http://www.dca.ca.gov/publications/s...judgment.shtml
So this isn't a full blown Superior Court appeal. Rather a specalized one designed for small claims cases, this time in front of a "real" judge rather than a small claims pro-tem jurist.The appeal from a judgment in small claims court is started by filing a Notice of Appeal (Form SC-140) with the small claims clerk within 30 days after the judgment is delivered or handed to the parties in court or, if the decision is mailed, within 30 days after the date the clerk mails the Notice of Entry of Judgment (Form SC-130) to the parties, whichever is earlier. The date of mailing (or in-court delivery) appears on the form. The fee for filing an appeal is $75. Once the defendant files a Notice of Appeal, the judgment from which the appeal is taken can't be enforced, and the defendant (judgment debtor) need not pay anything to the plaintiff (judgment creditor) unless and until the appeal is dismissed or the defendant loses the claim on appeal.
The judge who hears the appeal conducts the re-hearing in the same informal way that cases are heard in small claims court. The only exception is that an attorney may represent a party at the hearing on appeal. The judge who presides at the hearing on appeal allows the parties' attorneys to present evidence and examine witnesses under the judge's guidance and control.
I've climbed a cellphone tower
No I cannot claim credit for the most appropriate appellation "swill-spewing spokeshole."
Credit goes to Ken and John at KFI AM 640 Los Angeles.
I wish those guys would go after AT&T.Listen to John Kobylt and Ken Chiampou daily as they poke and prod at the fat bureaucrats, swill-spewing spokesholes, lazy and dishonest politicians, and anyone else that lies or tries to harm you. John and Ken don't just ***** n' moan about these problems, they unleash the John and Ken Mob and with the Mighty Bullhorn of Truth in hand, solve the problem.
www.kfiam640.com
Post Machine
I guess this is a battle of the quotes. My quote comes from the Judicial Branch of the California State Government. I would think that it is more authoritative than the Department of Consumer Affairs.
http://www.courts.ca.gov/superiorcourts.htmCalifornia has 58 trial courts, one in each county. In trial courts, or superior courts, a judge and sometimes a jury hears witnesses' testimony and other evidence and decides cases by applying the relevant law to the relevant facts. The California courts serve nearly 34 million people.
Listing of all Superior Courts
California Judicial Branch Fact Sheet
A Visitors' Guide to the California Superior Courts
Before June 1998, California's trial courts consisted of superior and municipal courts, each with its own jurisdiction and number of judges fixed by the Legislature. In June 1998, California voters approved Proposition 220, a constitutional amendment that permitted the judges in each county to merge their superior and municipal courts into a "unified," or single, superior court. As of February 2001, all of California's 58 counties have voted to unify their trial courts.
Superior courts now have trial jurisdiction over all criminal cases including felonies, misdemeanors, and traffic matters. They also have jurisdiction over all civil cases including family law, probate, juvenile, and general civil matters. Nearly 8.8. million cases were filed in the trial courts at some 400 court locations throughout the state during 1998-1999.
Appeals in limited civil cases (where $25,000 or less is at issue) and misdemeanors are heard by the appellate division of the superior court. When a small claims case is appealed, a superior court judge decides the case .
I've climbed a cellphone tower
Both are correct, the info I posted was a bit more complete, a "real" judge oversees the proceedings, however the format for the appeal is not the usual Superior Court appeal, rather its the informal court appearance as described earlier. Lawyers can come to these, however, and cross examine witnesses etc. Since there is no "record" from the small claims proceeding (ie no court reporter), you basically try the case all over again before the judge. This is not something handled by the appellate division of the Superior Court.
Post Machine
I never mentioned the appellate division. I said that appeals to small claims cases are handled by a Superior Court judge. I even showed the parallel to the court system in Virginia.
Sent from my GtabComb using HowardForums
Post Machine
Hear's a piece on what happened and what might happen.
http://paidcontent.org/article/419-8...igaOM%3A+Tech)An out-of-work truck driver from California made headlines on Friday when he turned the tables on AT&T (NYSE: T), and stuck it to the phone giant in small claims court.
A judge in Simi Valley awarded Matt Spaccarelli $850 after finding that AT&T had choked data on his iPhone even though his contract promised unlimited downloading. Other Americans are in a similar position and some reports say they are also in a position to cash in. Here’s a primer:
SEE ALSO: Verizon Offers Unlimited iPhone Data But May Throttle Its Heaviest Users
So just how did this guy beat AT&T?
Spaccarelli sued AT&T in small claims court for $10,000 and the judge gave him $850—a figure reportedly based on $85 a month for 10 months of Spaccarelli’s contract. AP, which broke the story, has more details here but it’s hard to confirm exactly why the judge ruled as he did. The ruling was from the bench and there’s no written decision that explains his reasons.
Will he really get $850?
AT&T has already said it will appeal the ruling so it will be months until Spaccarelli finds out if he can collect.
What happens at the appeal?
Under California law, a judge from the same court will hear the appeal like it’s a brand new case. The only difference is that the parties can use lawyers this time around. AT&T has an army of them but this may not make a difference because the appeal procedure is based on the same simple, streamlined rules of small claims court. If AT&T loses a second time, the decision is technically final though AT&T can still file a hail mary request for review to a higher court (which almost never review small claims decisions). Fans of civil procedure can learn more from this guide for judges.
If Spaccarelli wins, other customers cash in too, right?
Sorry, it’s not that easy. A judge’s decision in small claims court doesn’t create a legal precedent that others must follow. Ordinarily this type of case would lead to a class action suit (allowing everyone to sue at once), but AT&T short-circuited that option by banning these type of lawsuits in its customer contracts. This is a controversial tactic, but adivided Supreme Court agreed it was legal last year.
What If I want to sue AT&T too?
Every state has a small claims court system like California’s. Although the maximum amount you can claim varies by state, they all offer the chance to get in court quickly for a modest filing fee such as $41 in Idaho or $75 in Connecticut (you will typically get the fee back if you win but you might have to pay AT&T’s fee if you lose).
What does this mean for AT&T?
AT&T’s “no class action” rule helped to stifle consumer lawsuits, but a wave of small claims filings could open a new can of worms. To stop this, the company will likely go all out to shut down Spaccarelli as a way to deter others. The phone giant could, in theory, also seek to amend its Customer Agreement by eliminating the smal claims court option, and forcing all claims into arbitration (which would also make it easier to keep legal setbacks out of the media). The bottom line is that new lawsuits are for now likely to be a trickle rather than a flood. This could change if Spaccarelli wins the appeal.
Updated: Thanks to Red Jaguar in the comments section for noting that AT&T’s customer agreement relies on the arbitration rules of the non-profit American Arbitration Association. The AAA’s rules say that small claims court must be an option—meaning it is less likely that AT&T would try and remove the small claims provision. If it did so, it would have to also alter parts of the contract that refer to the AAA.
But if everyone goes to small claims, who will be left to be an ATT sales manager? That's what I want to know.
Bookmarks