ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate Governance Blogs -> The Race to the Bottom

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Corporate Governance

: The Race to the Bottom

The Appeal of Joe Nacchio: En Banc (A Student's Perspective)

By Trevor Crow

ADVERTISEMENTS

As a student contributor and managing editor of this blog I attended the en banc oral arguments in Joe Nacchio's appeal. Below, I provided my interpretation of the arguments by counsel from each side.

Maureen Mahoney, counsel for the defense, started by couching the issue as whether the defense forfeited its right to present Fischel?s testimony by failing to ask for a hearing. Mahoney argued that it was the court?s responsibility to require a separate hearing about the admissibility of Professor Fischel?s expert testimony. And that the en banc court should not permit the government to exclude Fischel?s testimony with a motion in limine on the day in which Fischel was supposed testify. Judges Briscoe, Holmes, and Lucero did not appear persuaded by this argument. Specifically, Judge Holmes noted that the party seeking admissibility has the burden to get its expert?s testimony admitted. When asked why the defense did not ask for hearing in response to the Rule 16 notice, Mahoney responded that the defense was not required to, she compared this to a court granting a motion for summary judgment because a party failed to attach all of its evidence to a reply.

Edwin Kneedler, counsel for the government, went straight into the standard of review by arguing that Judge Nottingham did not abuse his discretion by excluding Fischel's testimony without a separate hearing. Judge McConnell provided a majority of the tough questions directed at Kneedler. Judge McConnell seemed reluctant to accept that Fischel, a person who has testified in over 200 matters, could be denied as an expert witness. Whenever Judge McConnell would provide a good argument, however, Judges Holmes or Lucero seemed to throw out an easy question to get Kneedler back on track.

My prediction? The panel opinion will be vacated and the court will reinstate the conviction.

Full post as published by The Race to the Bottom on September 26, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0184 secs (new cache)