Rolo may get money after all

[Observer11]

How so? Can you read and comprehend the data on a chart? 192 reversals vs 78 reversals for the next highest numbers of reversals, means the 9th is far and away the most reversed. That was the point, although I did throw in the actual rate.

SCOTUS case reversal rates (2007 - Present)

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

As Rome used to say "If you're not cheating, you're not trying".

 

[UberCougars]

My only point is that WSU is going to be in the news from this issue over the next few years as both sides seem determined to take this to the Supreme Court.

All publicity is good publicity, right?

 

[OscarTheGrouch]

How so? Can you read and comprehend the data on a chart? 192 reversals vs 78 reversals for the next highest numbers of reversals, means the 9th is far and away the most reversed. That was the point, although I did throw in the actual rate.

SCOTUS case reversal rates (2007 - Present)

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

Why would you be looking at raw numbers vs percentages (while then only mentioning a percentage)?

But okay, I guess. So youve identified that the biggest circuit with more judges and more cases than the other circuits also has the most cases that go to SCOTUS. Shocking stuff.

And i guess you dont mention the equally meaningless fact that 9th circuit also has far and away the most affirmed cases looking at raw numbers.

 

[95coug]

How so? Can you read and comprehend the data on a chart? 192 reversals vs 78 reversals for the next highest numbers of reversals, means the 9th is far and away the most reversed. That was the point, although I did throw in the actual rate.

SCOTUS case reversal rates (2007 - Present)

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

192 reversals compared to 78 is not a rate, it’s just a number. 192 reversals out of 242 cases gives a reversal rate of 79%. 78 reversals out of 106 cases gives a reversal rate of 73.6%.

The sixth circuit has 71 reversals in 88 cases, a rate of 80.7%. That’s the highest of the circuit courts (and the ballotopedia site shows that in a chart, right before it actually states it outright).

If you want to compare the pure numbers of cases heard and reversed, you also need to consider the circuit’s case load. The ninth is huge, and hears more appeals and issues more decisions than any other - roughly 11,000 per year compared to around 3,000. With 3.67x the caseload, you could reasonably expect that 3.67x as many cases from the ninth would go to SCOTUS, If my math is right, the other circuits average about 66 cases reviewed (ranging from 37 for the first to 106 by the fifth) compared to 242 from the ninth. And it just happens that 66 x 3.67 equals exactly 242.

So…while the number of cases from the ninth that are reversed exceeds the other districts, that’s simply a matter of scale (scale also dictates that the ninth has more cases affirmed than any other circuit, and - by a wide margin - more cases that aren’t even accepted by SCOTUS and allowed to stand). The number of their cases accepted and reviewed exactly matches what would be expected based on caseload. Their reversal rate is at the high end, but isn’t the highest.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

192 reversals compared to 78 is not a rate, it’s just a number. 192 reversals out of 242 cases gives a reversal rate of 79%. 78 reversals out of 106 cases gives a reversal rate of 73.6%.

The sixth circuit has 71 reversals in 88 cases, a rate of 80.7%. That’s the highest of the circuit courts (and the ballotopedia site shows that in a chart, right before it actually states it outright).

If you want to compare the pure numbers of cases heard and reversed, you also need to consider the circuit’s case load. The ninth is huge, and hears more appeals and issues more decisions than any other - roughly 11,000 per year compared to around 3,000. With 3.67x the caseload, you could reasonably expect that 3.67x as many cases from the ninth would go to SCOTUS, If my math is right, the other circuits average about 66 cases reviewed (ranging from 37 for the first to 106 by the fifth) compared to 242 from the ninth. And it just happens that 66 x 3.67 equals exactly 242.

So…while the number of cases from the ninth that are reversed exceeds the other districts, that’s simply a matter of scale (scale also dictates that the ninth has more cases affirmed than any other circuit, and - by a wide margin - more cases that aren’t even accepted by SCOTUS and allowed to stand). The number of their cases accepted and reviewed exactly matches what would be expected based on caseload. Their reversal rate is at the high end, but isn’t the highest.

WTF are all these numbers? I'm the resident Accountant around here. Although I guess that's Math, which I did not excel in after HS. So you get a pass.

At any rate, if Rolo was struggling to get a real job before, he pretty much sealed his own coffin by pursuing this. Who is going to touch him now?

 

[Observer11]

WTF are all these numbers? I'm the resident Accountant around here. Although I guess that's Math, which I did not excel in after HS. So you get a pass.

At any rate, if Rolo was struggling to get a real job before, he pretty much sealed his own coffin by pursuing this. Who is going to touch him now?

Rolo has a job at Cal. So Cal touched him. Figuratively, not literally. The DOJ is pursuing this, not Rolo.

Rolo may stand to benefit financially but its not like he called up Pam Bondi and said "Hey, I can score $20 Million here - help a brother out".

Bigger game at play here.

 

[OscarTheGrouch]

Rolo has a job at Cal. So Cal touched him. Figuratively, not literally. The DOJ is pursuing this, not Rolo.

Rolo may stand to benefit financially but its not like he called up Pam Bondi and said "Hey, I can score $20 Million here - help a brother out".

Bigger game at play here.

As usual you are clueless. DOJ didnt (and could not) file this appeal. Rolo is the appellant. To claim that Rolo is not pursuing this is laughably ignorant. DOJ merely filed an amicus brief, and not a particularly substantial one. Notice Rolo’s own opening brief is much more detailed, and makes more legal arguments than DOJ’s amicus. DOJ’s focuses on just one of Rolo’s arguments, and is not really even one where DOJ can add anything meaningful. It looks more like they just worked up something quickly so they could make their public showing of support for one of right wing causes of the day. Its just part of dismantling DOJs civil rights division and making it political.

 

[Observer11]

As usual you are clueless. DOJ didnt (and could not) file this appeal. Rolo is the appellant. To claim that Rolo is not pursuing this is laughably ignorant. DOJ merely filed an amicus brief, and not a particularly substantial one. Notice Rolo’s own opening brief is much more detailed, and makes more legal arguments than DOJ’s amicus. DOJ’s focuses on just one of Rolo’s arguments, and is not really even one where DOJ can add anything meaningful. It looks more like they just worked up something quickly so they could make their public showing of support for one of right wing causes of the day. Its just part of dismantling DOJs civil rights division and making it political.

I said there was a bigger game at play here.

So we agree.

Rolo has a job.

 

[OscarTheGrouch]

I said there was a bigger game at play here.

So we agree.

Rolo has a job.

If you had said there is ALSO another game at play, and that is all you had said, sure. But that wasn’t the part of your post I was responding to.

 

[UberCougars]

As usual you are clueless. DOJ didnt (and could not) file this appeal. Rolo is the appellant. To claim that Rolo is not pursuing this is laughably ignorant. DOJ merely filed an amicus brief, and not a particularly substantial one. Notice Rolo’s own opening brief is much more detailed, and makes more legal arguments than DOJ’s amicus. DOJ’s focuses on just one of Rolo’s arguments, and is not really even one where DOJ can add anything meaningful. It looks more like they just worked up something quickly so they could make their public showing of support for one of right wing causes of the day. It’s just part of dismantling DOJs civil rights division and making it political.

Seems to be defense and restoration of a persons individual civil rights by DOJ, to me.

Or are you arguing for WSU’s civil rights? Can’t tell thru your seething anger.

 

[UberCougars]

If you had said there is ALSO another game at play, and that is all you had said, sure. But that wasn’t the part of your post I was responding to.

C’mon. It doesn’t matter what he said. You’d still be angry.

 

[dgibbons]

Even if the attorney was negligent and there was malpractice in failing to provide evidence cintrary to WSU affurmative defense, wouldnt Rolo still need to prove he wouldve succeeded? Otherwise, little to no damages. I.e. he wouldve lost either way, so sure, attorney was negligent, but damages = $0.

Depends on what you mean. Winning a trial and surviving summary judgment are different animals. A showing of a genuine issue of material fact on whether the standard of care was breached would go a long way on summary judgment, and would go a long way toward getting it settled. I offer no opinion on whether the standard of care was violated or not. A lack of evidence may be due to (...wait for it...) a lack of evidence.

 

[dgibbons]

LMAO. Dipshit in the white house pisses all over the constitution daily and you gargle his balls for it. You don't give one single **** about the constitution or this country. You only care about petty revenge against people you perceive as your enemy.

Comments like this are say more about you than the object of your attack.

 

[dgibbons]

The game isn't Rolo getting paid.

The game is establishing precedent on the carnage caused by mandatory injections overriding religious freedoms and objections.

Rolo wasn't the only one. Just the most visible.

Rephrased- The game is potentially exposing the states with the mandates, which I'd guess were significantly blue.

 

[dgibbons]

Not sure relying on Grok/AI to do your thinking for you is going to help much with improving your reading comprehension, but good luck!

To help you out a little, note that WSU’s defense doesn't rely on Rolo breaking a law. SoCal’s reference to an exception to health and safety laws is referring to exceptions to things like vaccine mandates (though he was making general statement not even specifically referring to Rolo’s case at that point). The issue is not whether Rolo violated a law, but whether he met requirements for exception to the vaccine mandate, or whether he can alternatively prove that the mandate was illegal or unconstitutional either on its face or as applied to him.

As to DOJ’s amicus brief, it is not going to persuade whichever panel from 9th circuit is assigned. If the panel wants go in direction DOJ argues, it would with or without DOJ’s half-assed brief in this case. Amicus briefs may matter in some cases, but not this brief. The brief doesn't add anything noteworthy that is not already argued in Rolo’s own opening brief.

The amicus brief before the 9th Cir. tells the 9th Cir. that the DOJ would be onboard with a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court. That will impact how the opinion is written.

 

[dgibbons]

WTF are all these numbers? I'm the resident Accountant around here. Although I guess that's Math, which I did not excel in after HS. So you get a pass.

At any rate, if Rolo was struggling to get a real job before, he pretty much sealed his own coffin by pursuing this. Who is going to touch him now?

Accountant shouldn't be capitalized. Nor should Math.