https://personal.ericgoldman.org/kaplan_and_barb/ Mon, 20 Jun 2005 21:24:08 +0000 hourly 1 https://personal.ericgoldman.org/kaplan_and_barb/#comment-122 Mon, 20 Jun 2005 21:24:08 +0000 http://blog.ericgoldman.org/personal/archives/2005/04/kaplan_and_barb.html#comment-122 These are legitimate questions, and we need to see what facts the plaintiffs can prove. However, at the complaint stage, it doesn’t bother me that the allegations are based on “belief” and that no supporting documents were attached; both of these are very standard. Eric.

]]> https://personal.ericgoldman.org/kaplan_and_barb/#comment-121 Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:53:57 +0000 http://blog.ericgoldman.org/personal/archives/2005/04/kaplan_and_barb.html#comment-121 Rodriguez and Fralich make all kinds of statements on “belief” but don’t refer to any documents or other proof. Conspiracy? Oliver Stone has not announced plans for a movie. Motivation? I wonder if either of these plaintiff’s passed their bar exam?

]]> https://personal.ericgoldman.org/kaplan_and_barb/#comment-120 Tue, 03 May 2005 16:01:14 +0000 http://blog.ericgoldman.org/personal/archives/2005/04/kaplan_and_barb.html#comment-120 As I recall from my days at a plaintiffs’ antitrust firm, the damges would be limited to three years, but an ongoing agreement in restraint of trade is actionable even if the agreement was initiated many years ago.

]]>