Candice conti case appeal

by ashpman 5 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  ashpman

  
  

  Just got this email. Does anyone know what this means?

  
  Disposition date (YYYY-MM-DD):		2015-04-13
  Disposition description:			Affirmed/part, rev/part, remanded w/direction
  Disposition status as of 2015-04-13:	Final
   
  Notes:  
  The judgment against defendants on the negligence count is affirmed.  

  The judgment against Watchtower on the cause of action for punitive

   damages is reversed with directions to enter judgment

   for Watchtower on punitive damages.  The parties are to bear their 

  own costs on appeal. 
   
   
  For more information on this case, go to:
  http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/disposition.cfm?dist=1&doc_id=2025979&doc_no=A136641
   
  For opinions, go to the following web site: http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions-slip.htm
  Court of Appeal opinions are generally available on the web site by 5 p.m. on the disposition date.  
  Unpublished opinions are generally available on the web site by 5���p.m. on the disposition date or 
  by 5 p.m. on the court workday following the disposition date. 
   
• 

  apocalypse

  "The judgment against defendants on the negligence count is affirmed."

  This means that Watchtower is still found guilty. Watchtower is the "defendant" 

  and their "negligence" has been "affirmed" in the case of the abuse.

  "The judgment against Watchtower on the cause of action for punitive  damages is 
  reversed with directions to enter judgment for Watchtower on punitive damages"
  This means that the "judgement" with respect to how much the Watchtower has to pay
  (punitive damages) is thrown out, and a new "judgement" (directions to enter) will be
   decided on by another court. 
  It is necessary then that each party pay their own legal cost as the money part 
  will be decided on later.
• 

  AFRIKANMAN

  Thank you for the above summary Apocalypse

  The accompanying reportage is interesting all the same.

  What are possible scenarios that could develop out of this now ???

  eg could it ultimately occur that Ms Conti gets awarded a new amount - less or in excess of the original - $28 M ??

  Could she be affected negatively in any way? Costs ? etc

  And does this mean all subsequent matters will now centre around the "punitive damages" part only ? It cannot become a criminal matter etc ?

  All the legal eagles valuable assistance here is always welcomed.

  ------------------------------------------------

  Edit: Ok I think I understand it a bit better now [its 4:30 am here now - still sleepy] ....its open to either party to take further action if they wish ??

  Is it [speculation ] in anyone's best interests to continue with the matter??
• 

  Gayle

  http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/scheduledActions.cfm?dist=1&doc_id=2025979&doc_no=A136641

  Future Scheduled Actions

  Jane Doe v. The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York Inc. et al. Division 3 Case Number A136641 Description Due Date Notes Remittitur issued. 06/15/2015 Something is due; see note. 04/20/2015 check on cd.
• 

  sloppyjoe2

  @afrikanman in my opinion it is only in the interest of the watchtower to take this higher. Candice has seen the payouts as well as the judgements whittle away from her favor as time goes on. In this case the watchtower has been held accountable but in a much lesser degree than originally ruled. If the watchtower wanted to try and reduce their payout to her, then it would be in their interest to appeal
  
• 

  Gayle

  http://www.courts.ca.gov/8547.htm#id12376

  California Supreme Court accepts only 4% or 5% of cases.