@Tigger

Quote:

There is no pain for Itec no matter what the result of the case, but having the judge decide thats is just a case about 25K and delivering software (ie why it was thrown back to the lower court) helps, not hinders Itec. The judge says the case is about the 1.5 page document, not this complex case you are trying to make it again.

how nice.

from the New York document..........

"Based on a plain reading of the complaint,this action,which seeks equitable relief
pertaining to the alleged breach of a software development contract falls within the standards for assignment to the Commercial Division as set forth in Uniform Rule 202.70(b)(1)"

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

@Spectre660

Quote:

"Based on a plain reading of the complaint,this action,which seeks equitable relief pertaining to the alleged breach of a software development contract falls within the standards for assignment to the Commercial Division as set forth in Uniform Rule 202.70(b)(1)"

Which, however, is the opinion of the judge who just got rid of the case, not of the judge who now has to hear it. His opinion was that it did not meet those standards.

Also interesting is that while this (now no longer involved) judge believes equitable relief is being sought, and cites that as the reason for re-assigning the case to the commercial section, Hyperion has stated that equitable relief is not being sought.

Fun and games ahead....

Last edited by umisef on 25-Oct-2007 at 05:11 PM.

@umisef

Quote:

fun and games ahead....

Thats the problem. there is no sure thing in law........... (unless you are Tig)

Although the last judge seems to be seeing the 2001 contract and the 2003 agreement as linked some how.

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

@umisef

OT:

How soon can you have an x86 "Power Up PPC" emulator ready to go for OS4 for classics ?

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card