Message ID: 173016
Posted By: al_petrofsky
Posted On: 2004-08-27 09:47:00
Subject: Scofacts updates

The official transcript of the July 21 Daimler hearing is
now available at (In case you missed it: the
video and the August 9 written order are there too.) See:

(You might have to scroll down to the hearing if your
browser doesn't handle that link correctly.)

The main improvement over my unofficial transcript is that
it contains amusing misspellings of the words the reporter
didn't know. Mr. Hice talks about Lennox (annie would be so

Also, the scorecard now has a summary (about 700 words) of
the half-dozen most significant court orders, which gives an
overview of everything that's been decided so far:

The Daimler transcript has an importance that none of the
other transcripts do. At the end of the hearing, Judge
Chabot gave a detailed ruling, which she was obviously
reading from something she had written before the hearing.
At some later date, Daimler submitted a proposed order for
her to sign to become the official written order. I haven't
seen that proposed order, and I don't think we ever will see
it, but based on SCO's objections to it (available at the
same link), it appears that Daimler did not obtain a copy of
whatever the Judge was reading, nor did Daimler attempt to
recreate it. Instead, Daimler's proposed order just
attached a copy of the entire hearing transcript and said
something to the effect "Summary disposition is granted as
to all claims except for the alleged breach of contract for
failing to respond to the request for certification in a
timely manner. See the transcript for details." I can't
understand why Daimler did this, rather than getting a clear
statement of the court's reasoning in the order. Thus, the
only written record of her reasoning contains all the
imperfections you expect in a transcript: lack of clear
punctuation, and a verbatim record of the errors she made
while reading it. I suppose it's not a big deal, but it's

(SCO objected that it was improper to include the entire
transcript, including the parties' arguments, as part of the
court's order, and that the transcript should just be
referenced rather than attached. SCO also objected that the
order was mistitled "Order Granting Defendant's Motion for
Summary Disposition" when in fact the motion was being
partially granted and partially denied. Daimler agreed to
SCO's alternative proposed order and Judge Chabot signed
it on August 9.)

The text of this Yahoo Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board user "al_petrofsky" under the following license: License: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Copyright 2004 Yahoo! SCOX. Messages are owned by the individual posters.