Search Tex Parte Blog

  • Google

    WWW
    www.texaslawyer.typepad.com

From Law.com

  •   An Affiliate of the
      Law.com Network

    From the Law.com Newswire

    Sign up to receive Legal Blog Watch by email
    View a Sample

« Morning docket | Main | The University of Texas at Austin, officials file response to cert petition in admissions case »

December 08, 2011

Comments

James Allan Scott

I am embarrassed for the attorney who counseled his client to ignore both the judge and AJ's direct orders while the MSJ was being determined, during which time Mr. Gormly's client followed the orders issued. I would love to know if Mr. Nicol was paid by his client before she left the state still ignoring the judge's orders in June to pay Mr. Gormly his requested fees. It is a poor attorney that doesn't adhere to court orders himself, never mind counseling a client to do so.

Mr. Anonymous, if you so support Mr. Gormly's clients' cause why are you hiding behind "Anonymous" in your post? I AM James Allan Scott. Against my will and agreement my private life has become a matter of scrutiny and public, but I am not afraid to hide behind a cloak of anonymity for I fear nothing in what I have to say as you may well be aware. For whatever you take it to be, I supported the press releases to show the inequality and ignorance about being transgendered. My life is not a joke, and neither are the lives of countless others out there that are being abused, ridiculed and murdered on a daily basis. Two judges in Dallas County have now declared that I am male with all of the rights and privileges accorded such. I don't need to hide behind anonymity, and I shouldn't have to prove that I am a male.

If you are embarrassed, Mr. Anonymous, then the embarrassment is all yours.

Art Leonard

The summary judgment denial would indicate that the judge thinks there are factual questions the case can't be dismissed outright as a matter of law. Given the factual allegations in the case, that must mean that the judge thinks it is possible that somebody born with female genitals can be considered in law to be a man and thus capable of entering into a valid marriage with a woman. If the judge didn't think this was at least a possibility, wouldn't she have granted the motion for summary judgment in light of the factual allegations before her?

Anonymous

@Bill Exactly. I am embarrassed for the attorney who is issuing press releases on his opposing counsel's denied summary judgment.I support his client's cause...but geez.

Bill Carson

How silly. One principle every attorney should learn in law school is that no judge has ever been reversed on appeal for denying a motion for summary judgment. By contrast, plenty of judges are reversed on appeal for granting summary judgments imprudently. Judge Hockett's ruling in this case carries no precedence whatsoever.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Facebook