tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post2259893779376308620..comments2024-03-28T06:07:03.667-04:00Comments on The Philosopher's Stone: JURISPRUDENCERobert Paul Wolffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11970360952872431856noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-31355028925413544512018-08-13T17:36:38.823-04:002018-08-13T17:36:38.823-04:00This story is commonly attributed to Freud (he tel...This story is commonly attributed to Freud (he tells it in *Interpretation of Dreams*). A quick search through newspaper archives, though, reveals its appearing as a lawyer joke at least as early as 1837.Jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09235055737221286801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-20550339507662814642018-08-13T17:28:27.058-04:002018-08-13T17:28:27.058-04:00As your son will tell you, pleading in the alterna...As your son will tell you, pleading in the alternative is a standard methodology that is taught in first year Civil Procedure. It can be very infuriating. In the example provided by Dean, the pleading is not as absurd as it may appear. Whether a contract has been formed, and what its terms are, can be a complex fact issue when there is no written document to memorialize what was agreed on, if anything. So the defendant is disputing whether, as a matter of law, an oral contract was formed by the words the parties exchanged; if the court determines that a contract was formed, then, he claims, the plaintiff, not the defendant, breached it.<br /><br />What Giuliani is doing he may think is like pleading in the alternative, but it is not as sophisticated. MSnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-67416538909345418312018-08-13T15:52:00.358-04:002018-08-13T15:52:00.358-04:00Even better! :)Even better! :)Robert Paul Wolffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11970360952872431856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-83659142501534013982018-08-13T15:19:15.917-04:002018-08-13T15:19:15.917-04:00A librarian of law and...you name it!A librarian of law and...you name it!Deannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-30553742699521977912018-08-13T15:17:10.908-04:002018-08-13T15:17:10.908-04:00Please tell me you are a Professor of Law!Please tell me you are a Professor of Law!Robert Paul Wolffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11970360952872431856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-199564476776680182018-08-13T15:11:48.360-04:002018-08-13T15:11:48.360-04:00Can't find the early English case, but arguing...Can't find the early English case, but arguing in the alternative is fair game in federal courts:<br /><br />"Defendant has raised numerous arguments as to why there was no enforceable contract; why, if there was such a contract, it was plaintiffs who breached; and why, if it was defendant who breached, plaintiffs' recovery is either limited or non-existent. Initially, plaintiffs argue that by counter-claiming for breach of a contract which defendant claims did not exist, defendant has ratified the contract.... Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(e) specifically allows a party to plead in the alternative.... Defendant is not in the position of arguing that something is both a fact and not a fact. Rather, he is arguing as to how the facts should be interpreted. Defendant's counterclaim, therefore, has not admitted the validity of the contract in question."<br /><br />Koedding v. Slaughter, 481 F. Supp. 1233, 1237 (E.D. Mo. 1979), aff'd, 634 F.2d 1095 (8th Cir. 1980)<br /><br />Of course, neither Giuliani nor Trump is in court. Yet.Deannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-39342926654505590692018-08-13T14:50:51.504-04:002018-08-13T14:50:51.504-04:00So help me God.So help me God.Paul Kernnoreply@blogger.com