[Am-info] Microsoft ordered to carry Java

[T. Guilbert]

In a message dated 2002 December 24 (Tuesday), timestamp 06:16 PM, 
   on the topic Re: [Am-info] Microsoft ordered to carry Java,
   "John J. Urbaniak" <jjurban@attglobal.net> wrote:

"|I thought Judge Motz was to rule definitively on the applicability
"|of Judge Jackson's Findings of Fact to other actions which might be
"|filed against Microsoft - in other words, whether "res judicata"
"|indeed applies.

Res judicata would not apply in any event; the legal doctrine would be
collateral estoppel.  There days, collateral estoppel usually is
called issue preclusion. 

"|Has anyone heard if he ruled on this?  

He did not _need_ to rule specifically on that, and a good jurist does
not rule on anything not necessary to the decision in the case.  If he
used some of Judge Jackson's findings of fact, that would amount to
the same thing, though. 

"|I know that Microsoft tried
"|to claim that because they had reached a settlement with the DoJ,
"|that the Findings could not be used.

I think there was speculation among nonlawyers that Microsoft would
make such an argument; I cannot imagine a competent lawyer making it. 
(One assumes that Microsoft's lawyers are competent.)  The findings of
fact (as opposed to the remedy) were affirmed on appeal, before the
settlement.  The settlement affected the remedy, but could not affect
the affirmed decision in the litigated issues. 

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
/*\   T. Guilbert
\ /   "Ethical at One of One dot Net"  
 X    Portland, Oregon, United States of America  
/ \     [ASCII Ribbon Campaign against HTML postings] 
-----------------------------------------------------------