Welcome to Wittenberg!

See likes

See likes given/taken

Your posts liked by others

Pages: [1] 2
Post info No. of Likes
Re: Invasion!
No, not really. But I couldn't stare at this empty page any longer.

How much does a one bedroom apartment rent for around here? I'm looking for a weekend escape destination and this place seems like a good place to relax.

We will be passing an anti-Airbnb law shortly. :-)

December 06, 2019, 02:24:02 PM
Estats Xhenerais - States General - Grand Session X As you all know, I was the only person to claim their seat in the Estats Xhenerais. 

I stated elsewhere that I will not govern alone and will submit and take any submission from a citizen of the United Provinces into debate.  New laws will only be adopted if there is a majority of an informal vote of participants.   I explained this here: http://talossa.proboards.com/thread/13748/declaration-estats-xhenerais-grand-session?page=1&scrollTo=168443

However, article III, §§ 8 and 9 of the Constitution of the United Provinces of Vuode and Dandenburg mandate that a Premier and a Presiding Office be chosen from within the Estates Xhenerais.  There is no bar against one person holding both positions unless I am missing something.  Given that no other person can hold these seats, by operation of law, I assume both. :-/

That said, what legislation do we want to see adopted?

December 09, 2019, 04:45:12 PM
Re: Talossan judicial precedents Everyone. Stop. You're misunderstanding.

A motion to reargue/renew does not undermine stare decisis or judicial precedence.

This motion is available at all NY's court levels. They're quite common at the trial level, and maybe success is more possible but still rare. It does not upset stare decisis because it's usually the court got the facts or law wrong. The last time I saw it happen was I had won a motion to sever and then a motion to dismiss. In the underlying action, the clerk never removed my client from the matter. When the law secretary wrote up a new order after other motions, somehow I was back in a second third-party action. Surprisingly, my adversary, who lost her motion, moved to renew to clarify the parties. I was taken out.

The motions are also made at the appeallate level. They are not a bad thing. They're rarely granted. They don't hurt stare decisis because it's usually done pretty quickly.

Now, if the Court issues a decision and interprets a new law, but goes the other way, they could hurt. The Court should explain why it upsetting stare decisis.

Stare decisis is very strong in NY, and I think my analogy got misconstrued. NY courts can fix something if they got it wrong, but it's not like this is common place. So can we take a step back here?

January 20, 2020, 10:04:38 PM
Re: Talossan judicial precedents Alright. I'm done for the night. I do believe in jurisprudence and stare decisis. I spent hours researching Talossan jurisprudence to discuss it in my interview. AD, I think you misunderstood me. I'd appreciate if you could reread.what I put. I also suggest you look up this motion in your home jurisdiction (it exists). Say what you want about me, but do not paint me as an activist judge who will cast aside jurisprudence. You will get from me not only someone who truly believes in stare decisis, but has been writing an article for three years on the topic. I'd be the first person on that Cort that can discuss the topic thoroughly. You saying that I don't care about jurisprudence or stare decisis is actually a very hurtful personal attack because it's a bedrock to my legal philosophy. I hope you will take a step back and reconsider what said.
January 20, 2020, 10:14:02 PM
Re: Talossan judicial precedents
Well, okay. But I'm interested on whether you think that the Cort agreeing to hear the second case against 47RZ28 was (a) a violation of stare decisis; (b) analogous to a NY "motion to re-argue"; (c) a different case which was presented and argued properly, which I think are all the possible options. If I'd known the King was going to bring this up I would have asked you myself.

Can you all give me until tomorrow to respond? I obviously have some reading to do.

January 20, 2020, 10:15:14 PM
Re: Sad news for all Talossans May his memory be for a blessing.
January 31, 2020, 12:46:48 PM
Re: Comment on the Panache case
Another comment: if we had a functioning National Bar in this country, I would wish that counsel for both the Government and the Respondent* would have been subject to discipline (eg. barred from taking the next UC case) for regular outbursts and talking-out-of-turn in the just-concluded appeal.

In other words: we need a functioning National Bar in this country, because the lawyers are unruly.

(* You can't bar me, I'm the Seneschal  8) )

If I make it on the Cort, this is on my list. The Cort is supposed to set up the bar. I'm sure I could find support.among the justices to get this going.

February 24, 2020, 10:47:28 PM
Re: Comment on the Panache case It dawns on me that my "I'm done talking about this" may be percieved as cutting off the conversation, rude, and indicative that I was annoyed or sensitive.

None of this could be further from the truth. Ive learned in my career that "relitigating" an issue that is decided outside of the courtroom after you lose fuels resentment and frustration. The loser may want to vent but can come off as whiney. The winner may come off as smug. And nothing gets solved.

In many instances, NY uses short form orders. Meaning, for a lot of cases, after argument, the Court issues it's decision and then tells counsel to write out the order. I have a rule, "the loser never writes the order they lost." It's cruel. But when we confer, it's easy to start arguing again. I often say, "counselor, the Cort made its decision. Appeal it if you don't like it." Why? Because I have to work with these people and it's easy for the loser to lose his temper. Win graciously.  When you lose, someone who doesn't rub it in your face is appreciated.

That is not what, I think, Epic was doing here. But we both stated our positions and that was that. Others can chime in. I saw no reason to relitigate the issue.

So please, do not think I was being dismissive or rude. I will talk legal theory all day, but once we have an answer, especially one with so many tempers, I felt it best to walk away. 

February 24, 2020, 10:55:16 PM
Notice of Intent to Appoint a Senator Citizens of the United Provinces of Vuode and Dandenburg,

In accord with the proscription in the Organic Law, yesterday I resigned as your Senator on account of my elevation as a Justice to the Uppermost Cort of Talossa.  This tracks with my commitment to retire from public life on the national stage.  However, I intend to continue my services in the Estats Xhenerais and as your Premier. 

As Premier, Org.L.IV.10 requires that I appoint a Senator for the United Provinces to serve the remainder of my term, which expires at the end of the 54th Cosa, within a fortnight of the vacancy (i.e. until March 14, 2020) lest the mandate falls to King John or his appointed Custaval. 

I have informed @Eðo Grischun of my intent to appoint him Senator, which is not all that unexpected.  However, the Rt. Hon. Grischun expressed to me that he needs to wrap up some issues in his role as head of the PNP party in the Cosa.  As such, I am merely stating my intent to appoint the Rt. Hon. Grischun but am not formalizing the appointment quite yet.  I imagine that formal appointment will be made and transmitted to the national government within the next week.

In the interim, I ask all citizens of the United Provinces to come forward and help us figure out what we can do to get you active, to get you wanting and committed to helping the United Provinces, and to ensure that you remain active.  I understand extra-Talossa life happens, but Talossa and the United Provinces will be more fun with your contribution. 

Thank you.

March 01, 2020, 10:56:16 AM
Appointment of Senator for the United Provinces of Vuode and Dandenburg Citizens of the United Provinces of Vuode and Dandenburg,

On March 1, 2020, I posted a Notice of Intent to Appoint a Senator, which you can find at https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=154.msg884#msg884

As Premier of the United Provinces, and in accord with Organic Law article III § 7 (former article IV § 10), I appoint @Eðo Grischun to fill the vacant seat of Senator for the United Provinces of Vuode and Dandenburg for the remainder of its term to the fullest extent permitted under the Organic Law.

My congratulations to @Eðo Grischun

On another note, I am excited to have done this under the new Organic Law, which only came into force in the last few days.


Viteu Marcianüs

March 02, 2020, 05:59:29 PM