Chapterhouse Lawsuit - Settlement reached, Appeals withdrawn - Pg 234! Chapterhouse to re-open store

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Alpharius**

I meant 'settle', not 'drop'.

Or maybe 'stop attempting to appeal', or whatever!

**weeble1000**

Kilkrazy wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe it is too late for GW to drop the case.

It has been fought, and now the argument is about how much can be changed in the appeal process.

Presumably GW believe they will get some of the roughly 75% points that went against them, changed back in their favour.

I don't know at what stage the "obiter dicta" come out and get incorporated into case law.

You can ALWAYS settle out. As long as both parties agree to settle out, the Court almost always agrees to dismiss the case. In a jury trial you can settle even whilst deliberations are ongoing. In fact, the purpose of the suspended briefing schedule is expressly to encourage the parties to discuss settlement.

Edit: Ah, I get your point. Yes, it is too late for one party to extricate themselves from the suit without the consent of both the Court and the opposing party. GW could drop its cross appeal, but that would not impact Chapterhouse's appeal.

**czakk**

Kilkrazy wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe it is too late for GW to drop the case.

It has been fought, and now the argument is about how much can be changed in the appeal process.

Presumably GW believe they will get some of the roughly 75% points that went against them, changed back in their favour.

I don't know at what stage the "obiter dicta" come out and get incorporated into case law.

Obiter dicta are the parts of a decision that are said in passing - they may be persuasive but aren't binding. Side comments, hypitheticals, context etc...

The ratio decidendi is binding. It is made up of the crucial facts and law of the case.

Obiter can become binding if subsequently quoted and used in the ratio of a later case.

**NTRabbit**

Not completely relevant, but it's worth pointing out that it isn't all roses for Apple in the battle against Samsung - they may have won round 1 in the US, but they've lost just as many in other jurisdictions if memory serves.

**Breotan**

Chapterhouse is only selling in one jurisdiction afaik.

**Kilkrazy**

I bought stuff from Chapter House and had it sent to the UK.

**Saldiven**

NTRabbit wrote:
Not completely relevant, but it's worth pointing out that it isn't all roses for Apple in the battle against Samsung - they may have won round 1 in the US, but they've lost just as many in other jurisdictions if memory serves.

This is very accurate. Worldwide, Apple has lost as many of these suits as they have won. (Or close to it.)

**weeble1000**

Saldiven wrote:
NTRabbit wrote:
Not completely relevant, but it's worth pointing out that it isn't all roses for Apple in the battle against Samsung - they may have won round 1 in the US, but they've lost just as many in other jurisdictions if memory serves.

This is very accurate. Worldwide, Apple has lost as many of these suits as they have won. (Or close to it.)

I guess Apple had really good help in America.

**Alpharius**

Any chance we could get this thread back on topic?

Thanks!

**Aerethan**

Alpharius wrote:
Any chance we could get this thread back on topic?

Thanks!

Certainly!

I don't see CHS settling unless he has some number in his head that he feels would convince him to just walk away from this. And I'd imagine any settlement GW would even consider would still demand that CHS cease to exist, to make it look like they won.

**weeble1000**

Edit: Don't know how a double post happened. Stupid iPhone. (Oh the irony)

Automatically Appended Next Post:

weeble1000 wrote:
Edit: Don't know how a double post happened. Stupid iPhone. (Oh the irony)

Arrrrrg! No double post!?! What?

I'll repost my comments later.

**Platuan4th**

weeble1000 wrote:
Edit: Don't know how a double post happened. Stupid iPhone. (Oh the irony)

Automatically Appended Next Post:

weeble1000 wrote:
Edit: Don't know how a double post happened. Stupid iPhone. (Oh the irony)

Arrrrrg! No double post!?! What?

I'll repost my comments later.

Sometimes the system catches it while you're editing the second post. It seems to delete the first post, not the second, so only your edited post remains. Next time, wait a couple minutes and reload before editing to say "Double Post!".

**d-usa**

Main thing to remember:

Dakka auto-appends your posts. If it is a true double-post you would see just one post with the message posted twice.

If you see two actual posts that didn't auto-append, then there is a glitch that you just ignore and it will go away.

**Kilkrazy**

The system does sometimes create double posts.

I have always assumed it was just a glitch in The Matrix.

**Saldiven**

Aerethan wrote:
Alpharius wrote:
Any chance we could get this thread back on topic?

Thanks!

Certainly!

I don't see CHS settling unless he has some number in his head that he feels would convince him to just walk away from this. And I'd imagine any settlement GW would even consider would still demand that CHS cease to exist, to make it look like they won.

I think both of your guesses are probably pretty accurate, which would mean a settlement is probably pretty unlikely.

**Ouze**

I'm going to reproduce, in part, a post weeble made elsewhere. Discussing it further would have been OT for the thread it was in but is on-topic here.

weeble1000 wrote:
GW is sadly following a pattern that game companies have followed in the past.

And one thing that Derek has not contemplated is what effect the GW v CHS appeal will have on perceptions of the company. That appeal will be wrapped up in a year at most. It could be done as soon as the next financial report, but probably not. GW losing the CHS trial was bad for the company, but not so obviously bad to have a direct impact on the investor perceptions of the company. But a favorable result for CHS in the appeal will not go unnoticed.

If CHS is successful in its appeal it will likely make broad new case law. It will hit mainstream legal media in a big way. It will percolate to mainstream media. It will put a seal on the case with a big W for CHS and trash GW's goodwill with customers. GW could possibly face further litigation from CHS with literally millions in potential damages that GW does not have money on hand to pay. Technically, could GW pay a 5 million dollar judgment...sure, but GW does not have the spare cash on hand for a judgment like that to not be a huge problem.

If CHS succeeds in its appeal, it will give the board clear cut reasons to force out Tom Kirby. Gill Stevenson has already been let go. GW can't fire her twice.

So screw what the stock market says. I look at what the FLGS and the 7th circuit says about GW. Only a fool would say that GW is not facing significant challenges at the moment that, if handled badly, could cause significant harm to the company. GW is walking around with a huge target on its face. It survives despite efforts of competitors to harm, maim, and kill it. GW showing weakness has only and will only inspire competitors to push harder.

.... where are GWS looking at this giant possible judgement, a 5 million dollar judgement, against them? This is the first I've seen it discussed. I know it was framed as hypothetical but what is the thinking?

**Dysartes**

My guess would be some form of malicious prosecution counter-suit.

However, we could light the weeblesignal, and let him explain...

**Dheneb**

Yeah, I think the possibility of malicious litigation was brought up a while ago, but that would be an entirely new lawsuit, which Villacci said (in this thread) wasn't going to happen.

**weeble1000**

Dheneb wrote:
Yeah, I think the possibility of malicious litigation was brought up a while ago, but that would be an entirely new lawsuit, which Villacci said (in this thread) wasn't going to happen.

All I've said about it before was that if a court rules that a plaintiff spent 3 years dragging an indigent defendant through costly litigation only to fail to bring evidence to prove threshold issues, that's pretty close to a finding of malicious litigation all by itself. Malicious litigation requires that the plaintiff knowingly did not have legitimate basis to bring a claim. It is hard to say you didn't know your claim had no merit when you brought no evidence at all to trial.

That's all I said. Then the plaintiff would have to pay attorney's fees, which, spitballing, is at least several millions in the case of Chapterhouse.

That result is simply one possible result. I have no opinion about its relative likelihood, just that it is within the realm of possibility.

**jonolikespie**

So are you saying its possible for the court to look at this case and just decide GW suck and has to pay CH or would all that still require CHs lawyers to ask the court for that and argue their case?

**mullet_steve**

Chapterhouse would have to file a lawsuit against Games workshop telling the court that GW are bullies etc and then GW would have an oportunity to argue their case

**paulson games**

I'm not certain but in order for them to pursue a counter suit for being subject to malicious legal practice I believe that the defendant must be found clear of all of the claims. Even if some counts are thrown out if the plaintiff is found to have at least one valid claim in their suit then it's not ground for being classified as malicious litigation. From my understanding the only way for CHS to be able to file counter suit was if they won on appeal against all of the claims.

That's why the "throw in every plus the kitchen sink" approach is popular. They place a huge amount of items in the claim hoping at least one sticks which grants them a "win" and thus protection against counter suit. Which is part of why they kept circling so tightly around the "who won" title in the eyes of the court. Even if they lose the majority of the claims GW wants to be the winner (even if it's on as little as one item) so that their suit is able to be found as having grounds/merit.

The "winner" can also request to have the court award costs to their side in addition to any damages in the final court judgment. So basically hey we're suing you for x amount in damages plus all of our legal fees if we win.

**weeble1000**

paulson games wrote:
I'm not certain but in order for them to pursue a counter suit for being subject to malicious legal practice I believe that the defendant must be found clear of all of the claims. Even if some counts are thrown out if the plaintiff is found to have at least one valid claim in their suit then it's not ground for being classified as malicious litigation. From my understanding the only way for CHS to be able to file counter suit was if they won on appeal against all of the claims.

That's why the "throw in every plus the kitchen sink" approach is popular. They place a huge amount of items in the claim hoping at least one sticks which grants them a "win" and thus protection against counter suit. Which is part of why they kept circling so tightly around the "who won" title in the eyes of the court. Even if they lose the majority of the claims GW wants to be the winner (even if it's on as little as one item) so that their suit is able to be found as having grounds/merit.

The "winner" can also request to have the court award costs to their side in addition to any damages in the final court judgment. So basically hey we're suing you for x amount in damages plus all of our legal fees if we win.

It's claim by claim Jon. I think you may be thinking of costs. You have to prevail on a claim to bring a litigation tort claim. But it is not determined on a whole lawsuit basis, merely claim by claim. CHS could have filed on the claims dismissed by Judge Kennelly already.

You can file a malicious litigation counterclaim and try them all in one trial, but that is because there are substantive facts in common. The jury would then render a verdict claim by claim, and for those claim found in favor of the defendant, then decide the malicious litigation issue.

The kitchen sink approach is a keep your options open, maintain flexibility, broaden discovery scope issue. Malicious litigation is really hard to prove, so most people don't worry about it. But a finding of no evidence presented...at all...is virtually ipso facto malicious litigation.

Besides, if CHS prevails on the type of threshold issues I'm talking about, and we don't even know if that is what CHS will argue on appeal, merely what we've seen in post trial motions, but if CHS were to prevail on those issues at the appellate court, CHS would have won everything.

**OIIIIIIO**

Nothing of note happening on this or is it tied up some other way? I have been most curious about this endeavor that GW has embarked upon.

**Steelmage99**

We are all curious what happens to the appeals process that is currently ongoing, but we just live with the wait.

You, on the other hand, are the definition of a cock-tease.

**RiTides**

Yeah, I thought there was news

**loki old fart**

RiTides wrote:
Yeah, I thought there was news

Didn't we all

**czakk**

There haven't been any developments, briefing is still suspended.

**weeble1000**

czakk wrote:
There haven't been any developments, briefing is still suspended.

You know what they say, 'no noose is good noose'.

**poda_t**

weeble1000 wrote:
czakk wrote:
There haven't been any developments, briefing is still suspended.

You know what they say, 'no noose is good noose'.

unlesss you're in management, in which case it's free nooses for everyone!