FEARANDGREED
3 days ago
Remittitur Issued/Case Closed.(SC) ....An appellate court (in this case Nevada SC) is sending the decision a back to the trial court to officially inform them of the decision. Period.
Calasse had 14 days after the verdict (NOT 14 working days) to file a grievance ....there are three different versions of said grievance (and Im not explaining them here) ...basically the Supreme Court's version of a -request for review- if you will. Calasse did not file any one of the "said grievances".
...I believe that (this issue) is what Mr. Sharps tweet was referring to here:
https://x.com/WorldwideNFTInc/status/1867954042560815561
The following is directly from the Clerk Of the Nevada Supreme Court:
Calasse did NOT file ANY form of grievance within the (above mentioned) statutory time frame. The "Issued Remittitur" is simply procedural. They do not have a copy available in real time as it was just filed today.
If anyone has ANY questions, I suggest that they contact the court directly @ 775 684 1600
I also sent this information to my swinging dick neighbor/friend/40 year practicing attorney:
And he said... Its over. ..He did add that a remittitur can specify whether a party (the winner) is entitled to recover legal costs that stacked during the appeal process.
Per previous conversations with him immediately after the dismissal (and the conclusions drawn) , I will refer to a post of mine from Thursday, December 19
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175552512
.....This case is done/finished in its current capacity...period.
Of course (and this applies to anyone), Calasse could bring this before a court of law again if he could conjurer up a legitimate and meaningful reason to do so... but at this point, the aforementioned skates dangerously close to frivolous lawsuit territory (for which there can be major consequences)
....BUT, none of the above going to happen, as he has already gone through two camps of attorneys, and has been shut down on multiple arguments via multiple courts.
AND...when I use the term "conjurer" above, I want you to picture three witches standing over a cauldron casting spells... Because they are they only types that would be bat-shit crazy enough to represent him (Calasse) at this point.
surfkast
3 days ago
01/02/2025 Case Status Update Remittitur Issued/Case Closed.(SC)
remittitur
Primary tabs
A trial court order in response to an excessive damage award or verdict by a jury which gives the plaintiff the option to accept a reduced damage award or conviction, or the court may order a new trial. Latin for βto send back, to remit.β The purpose of remittitur is to give a trial court the ability, with the plaintiffβs consent, to correct an inequitable damage award or verdict without having to order a new trial.
While most commonly used in the civil context where the judgment involves monetary damages, remittitur may also occur in the criminal context to give the plaintiff the option to accept a lesser conviction or potentially face a new trial. For example, in Commonwealth v. Reavis, the Massachusetts Supreme Court affirmed a remittitur to convict defendant of a lesser crime, since the weight of the evidence, although sufficient to support the greater crime, pointed to the lesser crime.
Specific criteria must be met before a court can grant a remittitur. In the foundational Ohio Supreme Court case, Chester Park v. Schulte, the Court laid out four criteria that must be met before a court can grant remittitur:
Unliquidated damages are assessed by a jury,
The verdict is not influenced by passion or prejudice,
The award is excessive, and
The plaintiff agrees to the reduction in damages.
Many jurisdictions follow these or similar considerations when ruling on whether to grant a remittitur. Furthermore, some jurisdictions adhere to the βWisconsin rule,β which allows plaintiffs to appeal remittiturs. First enunciated in by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in Plesko v. Milwaukee, under the Wisconsin rule, a plaintiff who accepts a remittitur may appeal the trial court's determination of the damage issue if the opposing party appeals any issue. If the reviewing court finds no error as to the determination of damages, the plaintiff's prior acceptance of judgment for the reduced amount will be affirmed unless the result of the principal appeal requires otherwise. Oregon, however, denies the availability of remittitur completely, as the Oregon Supreme Court in State ex rel. Young v. Crookham found that it violated the Oregon Constitution.
[Last updated in April of 2021 by the Wex Definitions Team]
r-avilo
5 days ago
Go easy on No Glow,
His pumperboy left him, on New Yearβs Eve!!
He sad, tequila and Tacos not helping..
Happy 2025, to everybody that is a share holder.. New Sheriff in town things change..
Stay tuned for regular programming, and updates from George in this New Year..
Maybe No Glow and Yolo can console each other . Lol
surfkast
1 week ago
He has to be flying based on his races. George is too busy with his ponies going from the East to the West and back.
FWIW, he thanks all the marks who are contributing to his addiction.
Current Entries
Fair Grounds - 12/28/2024
Race Race PP ($1.00) Race Type Breed Purse Surface Horse Jockey
9 Woodchopper Stakes TB $100,000 Turf Kennel Club David Cabrera
Fair Grounds - 12/29/2024
Race Race PP ($1.00) Race Type Breed Purse Surface Horse Jockey
5 Claiming TB $24,000 Turf Pico d'Oro Brian Hernandez, Jr.
Santa Anita - 12/29/2024
Race Race PP ($1.00) Race Type Breed Purse Surface Horse Jockey
7 Eddie Logan Stakes TB $100,000 Turf Sabertooth Umberto Rispoli
Oaklawn Park - 12/29/2024
Race Race PP ($1.00) Race Type Breed Purse Surface Horse Jockey
8 Allowance Optional Claiming TB $130,000 Dirt Moneyline Emmanuel Esquivel