Lots of overreactions to the latest in this case.
First, it is standard practice in federal court for the parties to submit proposed jury instructions as part of what is known as the Final Pretrial Order. The Final Pretrial Order includes the parties' Statement of Issues, Trial Briefs, Witness Lists, Exhibit Lists, Motions in Limine and Proposed Jury Instructions. It is also not particularly unusual if the parties submit competing Proposed Jury Instructions that a Court will request briefing on the law as to why the parties believe their Proposed Jury Instructions accurately state the law to be applied by the jury.
Second, juries decide facts; judges decide applicable law. A judge must decide what law applies and must issue a ruling on appropriate jury instructions so that the jury can apply the proven facts to existing law.
Third, Judge Cannon has made no decision at this point other than to request briefing on the competing Proposed Jury Instruction.
I'm definitely in the "Judge Cannon has no business serving on the federal bench" camp. Her track record leaves much to be desired and the 11th Circuit's opinion reversing her rulings in the Special Master matter was as big of a "beat down" as I've seen out of a federal appeals court in a long time. It did not use the words "you are a f--king moron" but that's the conclusion.
Andrew Weismann's comments about the proposed jury instruction are accurate. It misstates the law and, IF permitted, there is no reason to try the case because all DT Barnum would have to say is "I authorized myself to keep them." If Judge Cannon feels as if the proposed Jury Instruction accurately states the law, she should have granted a Motion for Summary Judgment.
I expect that she will ultimately decide that the DOJ's proposed instruction is the right one to submit to the jury. There's no reason to be "up in arms" until she's ruled. And, again, even though I think that she's a mental pygmy, she certainly isn't handing DT Barnum any significant wins in the pre-trial procedures.
First, it is standard practice in federal court for the parties to submit proposed jury instructions as part of what is known as the Final Pretrial Order. The Final Pretrial Order includes the parties' Statement of Issues, Trial Briefs, Witness Lists, Exhibit Lists, Motions in Limine and Proposed Jury Instructions. It is also not particularly unusual if the parties submit competing Proposed Jury Instructions that a Court will request briefing on the law as to why the parties believe their Proposed Jury Instructions accurately state the law to be applied by the jury.
Second, juries decide facts; judges decide applicable law. A judge must decide what law applies and must issue a ruling on appropriate jury instructions so that the jury can apply the proven facts to existing law.
Third, Judge Cannon has made no decision at this point other than to request briefing on the competing Proposed Jury Instruction.
I'm definitely in the "Judge Cannon has no business serving on the federal bench" camp. Her track record leaves much to be desired and the 11th Circuit's opinion reversing her rulings in the Special Master matter was as big of a "beat down" as I've seen out of a federal appeals court in a long time. It did not use the words "you are a f--king moron" but that's the conclusion.
Andrew Weismann's comments about the proposed jury instruction are accurate. It misstates the law and, IF permitted, there is no reason to try the case because all DT Barnum would have to say is "I authorized myself to keep them." If Judge Cannon feels as if the proposed Jury Instruction accurately states the law, she should have granted a Motion for Summary Judgment.
I expect that she will ultimately decide that the DOJ's proposed instruction is the right one to submit to the jury. There's no reason to be "up in arms" until she's ruled. And, again, even though I think that she's a mental pygmy, she certainly isn't handing DT Barnum any significant wins in the pre-trial procedures.
