Status Report 4/6/11
On the 4th, we filed three legal documents with the Court as scheduled.
1. We filed additional arguments against the Court honoring UCŐs petition for a demurrer. The Demurrer decision is the key to our entry into the court system. UC is basically asking us to prove our case to prevent the Judge from issuing the Demurrer. We re arguing that we have shown enough facts that our case should be heard. We have provided additional facts supporting denial of the Demurrer. We are also arguing that some of UCŐs cited precedents didnŐt support their conclusions. All told, I believe this filing is considerably stronger than our precious filings.
2. We filed arguments against the Judge taking Judicial Notice of a set of documents that UC provided him. Judicial Notice is a legal term that refers to a rule of evidence allowing a well-known, irrefutable fact to be introduced into evidence, which a judge may allow in the absence of any supporting testimony. On example fact UC would like to have noticed is the requirement in the LLNL management RFP that the new manager provide medical benefits for previous retirees, We are arguing, as I have often stated, the requirement has no relationship to UCŐs commitment to provide retiree medical benefits. To understand which documents we are objecting to, you have to read UCŐs request for Judicial Notice.
3. Judicial Notice is a two way street, so we filed a request for Judicial Notice of some information on RegentŐs early activities with regard to medical benefits that we received under the California Public Records Act.
To the best of my memory, the above filings represent the first time anything has happened as scheduled in our case. If the pattern repeats, UC will file their rejoinder(s) on the 27th of April and the hearing on the Demurrer will occur on May 5th.
The three filings mentioned above have been added to the Legal Filings list in the Information Archive on the web bsite,