Friday, September 28, 2007

The Respondent's REPLY BRIEF

a 57 page pdf file

Gallegos vs Pacific Lumber Company, et al
Case No. A112028
(Humboldt Superior Court No. DR030070
August 31, 2007

Note: Links to all four documents relating to the APPEAL are now in order in the sidebar under the MUST READ section.


  1. What the hell wrote this pos. Notice how I didn't say "who the hell wrote this pos?"

    I can't get over how bad this is. Argument in an introduction (which isn't appropriate even to have because this is a reply brief.) No cases to support the arguments made.

    Truly lame.

  2. Unlike the DA's brief, this one is well written and doesn't rely on making up the law along the way. The DA should stop wasting money and resources on this ill advised quest and spend some time on matters his office has sorely neglected like Cheri Moore.

  3. My earlier comment at 8:07 was to the reply brief and not the response which is well written, coherent, backed with the law and cites to the record.

    The reply by our county is truly pathetic.

  4. I admit it is confusing - all these briefs - I am contemplating consolidating them.

    In the meantime for all interested readers - I recommend you read the End of the Palco Suit - ORDER SUSTAINING DEMURRER WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND first - then Gallegos' brief will make more sense.

    Well, it may make some sense, but not much. Good luck.


Comments are open, but moderated, for the time-being. Good luck.