Motions: Plaintiffs File to Exclude LMSD Witnesses

Welcome Lower Merion residents!

We're glad you stopped by. Go ahead and register for a free account to get the benefits of being a member, including:
  • Access to all of our posts and comments
  • Your own profile including an avatar, buddy lists, and other social networking features
  • The ability to send private messages to other users on this site
  • The ability to chat and interact with other citizens and voters in and around Lower Merion.
Creating an account is easy. Register now!

(Don't live in Lower Merion? That's okay. We won't hold it aginst you.)
xf14ae's picture
Last seen: 4 years 8 weeks ago
Joined: 2008-11-20 :49

Motions in Students Doe vs. LMSD were filed yesterday in Federal Court. Most were what I expected based on the pre-trial Memorandums. What is most interesting is the motion I didn't expect: Plaintiffs Doe moving to exclude witnesses listed in LMSD's pre-trial memorandum. Why? Read on...

First, the Motion itself:

Doe Motion to Exclude LMSD Witnesses

Then, the supporting legal brief:

Doe Brief Supporting LMSD Witness Motion

Next comes Exhibit "A" - Letter from Does Attorney to Morgan Lewis:

Exhibit A - Motion to Exclude Witnesses

Then, Ehxibit "B" - Morgan Lewis' response:

Exhibit B - Motion to Exclude Witnesses

Really? We didn't tell you about these witnesses because you didn't ask? Seriously? This is the legal reasoning given by our $500 an hour high-powered taxpayer fueled attorneys?


Also, why would LMSD want to talk about their Superintendant's expertise in diversity when they claim racial diversity wasn't a factor in decision making? That's like bringing in experts on, say, his gourmet cooking experience, which is also irrelevent. Unless, of course, the process was driven by the desire to increase racial diversity at Harriton High School.

Average: 4.2 (6 votes)
Your rating: None