Third case, starts at 58 minutes

Yes my weight is out of control

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50211531)

Justice Kim asked you two different questions, and you sat there looking at a very hittable bitch each time. Her questions weren't softballs, but they weren't curveballs either or gotcha questions to make you look bad either.

One question was about preemption and the other was about legislative roles. She gave you the fair opportunity to address genuine concerns she had -- which is much better than a dead bench or a justice trying to make your position look dumb -- and you didn't answer her questions at all and just said what you wanted to say.

The only purpose of oral argument is try to flip a judge who may be open to seeing the other side. They already have a draft opinion going into oral argument and they have to release an opinion within 90 days, so it's obviously an uphill battle to flip them.

But if they ask a question, you need to see that as your opportunity to try to flip them. Most of the time at OA, I'm arguing to a dead bench who doesn't even bother to humor me with questions. If they ask a question, you need to do everything you can do address that justice's concern.

Even if you didn't think of a good answer right away to her questions, you could have circled back to her questions later in your argument or on rebuttal.

Also, the very end of your rebuttal -- "we're not asking for 6 or 7 figures, just 15k" -- would be been perfectly delivered as a jury trial closing argument, but it missed the mark here. These justices are technocrats, and this argument wouldn't have appealed to them even if you're 100% right. They're looking to affirm judgments in unpublished opinions on the simplest grounds possible. They're not looking to legislate from the bench or make groundbreaking law or get into policy shit. They're just looking to keep a low profile and not get reversed. They don't give an f about your policy and fairness arguments.

All this being said, I know nothing about your case and the relevant law, and I take it you have the much harder statutory argument and that you probably did the best you can with it. Also, nothing you said in the oral argument probably would have made a lick of difference because the case was already decided. But at the appeals court, your focus needs to be on technical legal arguments and not on jury trial theatrics.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50212165)

The third district ruled against our side in a very similar argument recently, and this district did as well (but a different division) in an unpublished opinion. I don’t think it’s a winner but I do think the case I mentioned repeatedly is our best argument in our favor

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50212216)

I'll reiterate that there's probably not a single thing you could have said or done either way at the OA that would have mattered one bit.

For me, keeping this in mind really helps take the pressure off at OA.

You're surely fucked if there are 2 recent bad cases. The unpublished case is just as good as published. The clerks can see the case and C&P from it and be influenced by it. It's total fraud. Shitty unpublished decisions make law.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50212234)

I'd prefer that you smile when receiving the justices' questions, instead of leaning forward and scowling at them though.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50211545)

I will be in Oahu all next week brother

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50212055)

Also your opponent looked like a hipster tranny

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50211584)

My opponent is a she/them on socials but was very kind throughout the case. Probably too nice of a human to be defending corporations against injured victims

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50211626)

your opponent probably takes out zher frustrations in a non-binary S&M dungeon at least once a week

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50211903)

we all need to lose some weight but you look good and sound good

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50211971)

hope you cru$h these frauds

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50212046)

*combs hair*

*gets suit dry cleaned*

*wears suit*

*repairs open remarks*

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50212213)

why everyone is so fat in the court except the one older white judge?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50212269)

https://www.munckwilson.com/people/marina-v-bogorad/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50212316)

Also it will never stop being funny to me that chandler is named Kenny and then Kenny is also named Kenny(?)

Whatever happened to Kenny tp anyway

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50212357)

We've come a long way.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50212535)

You should totally play again, just avoid those azn cheaters.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50212953)

I think at least half the table should be poasters. Add tsinah and a fempo.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5915843&forum_id=2#50212979)