Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 3rd Oct 2012 13:47 UTC
Legal "Samsung has now filed an unredacted version of its motion for judgment as a matter of law, a new trial, and/or remittitur. That's the one that was originally filed with a redacted section we figured out was about the foreman, Velvin Hogan. The judge ordered it filed unsealed, and so now we get to read all about it. It's pretty shocking to see the full story. I understand now why Samsung tried to seal it. They call Mr. Hogan untruthful in voir dire (and I gather in media interviews too), accuse him of 'implied bias' and of tainting the process by introducing extraneous 'evidence' of his own during jury deliberations, all of which calls, Samsung writes, for an evidentiary hearing and a new trial with an unbiased jury as the cure." It's a treasure trove of courtroom drama, this. Like this one: Hogan got sued by his former employer Seagate in 1993, causing him to go bankrupt. The lawyer in said case is now married to one of the partners of the law firm representing Samsung in this case. Samsung seems to implicitly - and sometimes explicitly - argue that Hogan had a score to settle in this case, because - get this - Samsung has been Seagate's largest shareholder since last year. Hogan failed to disclose the Seagate lawsuit during voire dire, which is a pretty serious matter. No matter whose side you're on, this is John Grisham-worthy.
Thread beginning with comment 537453
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Wed 3rd Oct 2012 17:30 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by MOS6510"
Member since:

I don't know the guy, but from what I read he does seem a bit odd which makes it even more odd he got picked as the main man.

To me it seems more logical, if you want to do jury trails, that they at least employ a professional person who leads the jury. Someone who knows the do's and don'ts.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by MOS6510
by Laurence on Wed 3rd Oct 2012 20:55 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by MOS6510"
Laurence Member since:

If I understand correctly, it was the jury that nominated him forman, not the judge nor lawyers.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Wed 3rd Oct 2012 21:01 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by MOS6510"
MOS6510 Member since:

Yes, I also think that's the case. They probably picked him because of his age and personality. He seems to be very talkative so chances are he was the most vocal and dominant of the bunch.

No matter who gets picked, capable or not, they should have some one who just tags along to make sure they don't make a mess of it.

Just like sports have referees I guess.

Reply Parent Score: 2