• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Ninth Circuit issues opinion on R-CALF border case

Help Support Ranchers.net:

foodmarket

Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2005
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Location
NJ
This will determine if Judge Cebull reschedules the hearing or not.


Full text, PDF, 56 pages:

http://www.foodmarket.com/newsemail.asp?key=267152
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
foodmarket said:
This will determine if Judge Cebull reschedules the hearing or not.


Full text, PDF, 56 pages:

http://www.foodmarket.com/newsemail.asp?key=267152

Cebull and R-Calf got trounced on all six allegations. That is called a "SWEEP" for the USDA and a complete "butt kicking" for the plaintiffs.
 

redriver

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
194
Reaction score
0
Location
se mb
Maybe now we can all get on with business and not have to listen to r-cult's constant ranting. The judgement was conclusive and r-cult and their crooked judge have no legal case.
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
Sandhusker, the Court decided on the evidence given. Hmmm, where have I heard something like that before?

Except the last judge involved only looked at one side of the evidence, on March 07.
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
Sandhusker said:
Looks like we're just supposed to trust the governement because they're supposed to know best.

Not everyone is foolish enough to trust R-Half. Sandhusker, explain why the group you support and their positions have been trounced in the courts.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Murgen said:
Sandhusker, the Court decided on the evidence given. Hmmm, where have I heard something like that before?

Except the last judge involved only looked at one side of the evidence, on March 07.

How much evidence could be given in 40 minutes? The way I interpreted a lot of it, Cebull wasn't supposed to look at much of the evidence - just enough to tell if the USDA was completely dropping the ball or not. It looks like the USDA is to be viewed as trustworthy until proven otherwise - and it will take an act of God to prove they're anything but the highest authority. I wonder what his retainer is? :lol:
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
Sandhusker said:
Murgen said:
Sandhusker, the Court decided on the evidence given. Hmmm, where have I heard something like that before?

Except the last judge involved only looked at one side of the evidence, on March 07.

How much evidence could be given in 40 minutes? The way I interpreted a lot of it, Cebull wasn't supposed to look at much of the evidence - just enough to tell if the USDA was completely dropping the ball or not. It looks like the USDA is to be viewed as trustworthy until proven otherwise - and it will take an act of God to prove they're anything but the highest authority. I wonder what his retainer is? :lol:

Sorry bud, but Cebull had the data in his hands well before the oral arguments were delivered. The same was true for the Ninth Circuit. Neither court was exposed to this data just during the oral phase of the hearing as your cop-out and excuse plea suggests. R-Calf's positions on six allegations were all overturned unanimously by all the judges. GET IT-R-Calf and Cebull got buried together which is quite appropriate given the circumstance.

The only thing worse than this defeat is for Cebull not to throw the entire case for a permanent injunction out. It has only been vacated at this time. R-Calf succeded to use him as a joker once, I hope he is not so foolish as to let them use him a second time.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
WOW what a ruling :clap: :clap: . I just finished reading the 56 pages and I can't see how R-CALF or Cebull can see anything positive out of it. :D Every reason R-CALF used and Cebull swallowed hook line sinker were hammered.
Statements like
the district court committed legal error by failing to respect the agency's judgement and expertise. Rather than evaluating the Final Rule to determine if USDA had a basis for its conclusions, the district court repeatedly substituted its judgement for the agengy's, disagreeing with USDA's determinations even though they had a sound basis in the administrative record, and accepting the scientific judgement of R-CALF's experts over those of the agency.
and
The district court listed six specific grounds as the bases for its findings that the Final Rule was arbitrary and capricious. We examined each of them seriatim and concluded that none of them supports its conclusion.
The only air being pushed in Billings after reading this ruling will be that air they are pushing back into Cebulls lungs after the big gasp he takes. Say Oldtimer you wanted to hear what the courts had to say what do you think about what the Court of Appeals had to say about the R-CALF arguments. Not One stood up under their examination. Wasn't it said that R-CALF would not beable to use the same arguments in the next trial (if there is one) that they used to get this injunction if they didn't stand up in the court of appeal. Looks like the R-CALF lawyers have some serious homework to do. I do hope they are smart enough to drop it now as any attempts to destroy the reputation of Canadian beef is going to backfire now that the U.S. has it's very own native case. :D :D
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
The original link did not work for me, I knew pretty much what it said, it's been said on here for months, but for those who could not download it either, here is another link.

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3A12983071711CF4882570490055E969/$file/0535264.pdf?openelement

Long live RCALF, they look sillier by the court case! :D :D :D
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
WOW what a ruling :clap: :clap: . I just finished reading the 56 pages and I can't see how R-CALF or Cebull can see anything positive out of it. :D Every reason R-CALF used and Cebull swallowed hook line sinker were hammered.
Statements like
the district court committed legal error by failing to respect the agency's judgement and expertise. Rather than evaluating the Final Rule to determine if USDA had a basis for its conclusions, the district court repeatedly substituted its judgement for the agengy's, disagreeing with USDA's determinations even though they had a sound basis in the administrative record, and accepting the scientific judgement of R-CALF's experts over those of the agency.
and
The district court listed six specific grounds as the bases for its findings that the Final Rule was arbitrary and capricious. We examined each of them seriatim and concluded that none of them supports its conclusion.
The only air being pushed in Billings after reading this ruling will be that air they are pushing back into Cebulls lungs after the big gasp he takes. Say Oldtimer you wanted to hear what the courts had to say what do you think about what the Court of Appeals had to say about the R-CALF arguments. Not One stood up under their examination. Wasn't it said that R-CALF would not beable to use the same arguments in the next trial (if there is one) that they used to get this injunction if they didn't stand up in the court of appeal. Looks like the R-CALF lawyers have some serious homework to do. I do hope they are smart enough to drop it now as any attempts to destroy the reputation of Canadian beef is going to backfire now that the U.S. has it's very own native case. :D :D

Tam they didn't get to introduce the evidence about all your contraband cows-- next hearing.....
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
OT, maybe they know more than you on the contraband cow thing. Sometimes, things are better left unsaid, but if you want to bring it up, talk to your leaders and see what comes out in public! I bet you have ten times the amount Canada has, like everything else!
 

redriver

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
194
Reaction score
0
Location
se mb
Oldtimer, you are one pathetic waste of animal flesh. You can't really be that stupid, can you? Of course, considering some of your other dislays of absolute ignorance, maybe you truly are that stupid.
The amazing thing is, there are even more extremely stupid people out there, and they belong to some has-been group called r-cult.
It looks like Cebull should be charged with interfering with the court process, abuse of judicial power, and simply being a dumbass. A few years in a federal slammer would make him think twice about taking bribes from idiots again.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Sandhusker said:
Murgen said:
Sandhusker, the Court decided on the evidence given. Hmmm, where have I heard something like that before?

Except the last judge involved only looked at one side of the evidence, on March 07.

How much evidence could be given in 40 minutes? The way I interpreted a lot of it, Cebull wasn't supposed to look at much of the evidence - just enough to tell if the USDA was completely dropping the ball or not. It looks like the USDA is to be viewed as trustworthy until proven otherwise - and it will take an act of God to prove they're anything but the highest authority. I wonder what his retainer is? :lol:

Sandhusker these judges had the same evidence that Cebull had, the USDA briefing, the R-CALF briefing and any other friend of the court briefing that was allowed, plus the 40 minutes of court testimony. It was not just what could be said in the court testimony that was ruled on. If you read the 56 pages you would have seen where they repeatedly refered to the briefings in the written ruling. What I would like to know is why it took three judges 11 days to write their 56 page ruling but it took the lone Judge Cebull less than 12 hours to write his 28 page ruling on the same evidence. Could it be that the three were looking at all the evidence including the court testimony and deciding on the merits of all of it, unlike Cebull who wrote his ruling by coping passages right out of the R-CALF briefing. :roll: Just maybe Cebull should have taken a bit more time to actually look at all the evidence and then maybe he wouldn't have been reading such a harsh ruling on his court ruling. I still wish R-CALF could be held accountable for the finanical damages they caused with their injunction and the Lies it took to get it.
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
WOW what a ruling :clap: :clap: . I just finished reading the 56 pages and I can't see how R-CALF or Cebull can see anything positive out of it. :D Every reason R-CALF used and Cebull swallowed hook line sinker were hammered.
Statements like
the district court committed legal error by failing to respect the agency's judgement and expertise. Rather than evaluating the Final Rule to determine if USDA had a basis for its conclusions, the district court repeatedly substituted its judgement for the agengy's, disagreeing with USDA's determinations even though they had a sound basis in the administrative record, and accepting the scientific judgement of R-CALF's experts over those of the agency.
and
The district court listed six specific grounds as the bases for its findings that the Final Rule was arbitrary and capricious. We examined each of them seriatim and concluded that none of them supports its conclusion.
The only air being pushed in Billings after reading this ruling will be that air they are pushing back into Cebulls lungs after the big gasp he takes. Say Oldtimer you wanted to hear what the courts had to say what do you think about what the Court of Appeals had to say about the R-CALF arguments. Not One stood up under their examination. Wasn't it said that R-CALF would not beable to use the same arguments in the next trial (if there is one) that they used to get this injunction if they didn't stand up in the court of appeal. Looks like the R-CALF lawyers have some serious homework to do. I do hope they are smart enough to drop it now as any attempts to destroy the reputation of Canadian beef is going to backfire now that the U.S. has it's very own native case. :D :D

Tam they didn't get to introduce the evidence about all your contraband cows-- next hearing.....

You can't be serious OT. Why can't you ever admit you are wrong? You have more excuses than grains of sand on a beach. It looks like your great legal minds let you down again.

The "contraband cows". That sounds like another original from the dream leadership team of R-Laugh. Sorry, I remember now, I saw that book right next to the Humpty Dumpty book.
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
I still wish R-CALF could be held accountable for the finanical damages they caused with their injunction and the Lies it took to get it.

Don't forget Tam, there is still the legal case against RCALF. Should be interesting! Damn, I guess they better get more members, they might need the fees to pay the court costs.
 

nenmrancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
416
Reaction score
0
Location
north eastern new mexico
redriver
Member



Joined: 09 Jul 2005
Posts: 96
Location: se mb
Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:14 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oldtimer, you are one pathetic waste of animal flesh. You can't really be that stupid, can you? Of course, considering some of your other dislays of absolute ignorance, maybe you truly are that stupid.
The amazing thing is, there are even more extremely stupid people out there, and they belong to some has-been group called r-cult.
It looks like Cebull should be charged with interfering with the court process, abuse of judicial power, and simply being a dumbass. A few years in a federal slammer would make him think twice about taking bribes from idiots again.
AS someone that does a lot of reading and little posting I would like to challenge you Redriver to post one positive comment or remark. Is that possible or are you just that bitter and nasty to everyone?
 

TimH

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,421
Reaction score
0
Location
Southwest Manitoba
Oldtimer, you are one pathetic waste of animal flesh. You can't really be that stupid, can you? Of course, considering some of your other dislays of absolute ignorance, maybe you truly are that stupid.
The amazing thing is, there are even more extremely stupid people out there, and they belong to some has-been group called r-cult.
It looks like Cebull should be charged with interfering with the court process, abuse of judicial power, and simply being a dumbass. A few years in a federal slammer would make him think twice about taking bribes from idiots again.

Hey Rumpranger, The only "pathetic waste of animal flesh" on this site is YOU!!! :mad:
I have to wonder if you are the type of person,and I use the term "person" very loosely, who would be brave or stupid enough to speak to Oldtimer or ME face to face, the same way that you post your ignorant remarks. I doubt it.

On the old bullsession site, readers were invited to post a "civil" reply. You might bear that in mind.......if,indeed, you have a mind.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
TimH said:
Oldtimer, you are one pathetic waste of animal flesh. You can't really be that stupid, can you? Of course, considering some of your other dislays of absolute ignorance, maybe you truly are that stupid.
The amazing thing is, there are even more extremely stupid people out there, and they belong to some has-been group called r-cult.
It looks like Cebull should be charged with interfering with the court process, abuse of judicial power, and simply being a dumbass. A few years in a federal slammer would make him think twice about taking bribes from idiots again.

Hey Rumpranger, The only "pathetic waste of animal flesh" on this site is YOU!!! :mad:
I have to wonder if you are the type of person,and I use the term "person" very loosely, who would be brave or stupid enough to speak to Oldtimer or ME face to face, the same way that you post your ignorant remarks. I doubt it.

On the old bullsession site, readers were invited to post a "civil" reply. You might bear that in mind.......if,indeed, you have a mind.

You better watch him Jethro. I think he likes those "Big Strong" boys like yourself. Finished with hay yet?
 

Latest posts

Top