In effect, he was asking the judge to throw out the four charges for lack
of validity.
His motion caused a veritable flurry of other motions from both sides
and effectively delayed the process of law by dividing the charges.
It also increased the cost to the plaintiff. It was a gamble for
the university. If it paid off, it would cut the charges down to two--
both federal, while disposing of all the others. If it didn't?
No problem, there were always appeals to be made that could
continue the process indefinitely.
At the hearing on these motions, Al Garret limited his argument to
a synopsis of his brief. He carefully related the applicable laws
and requested that the defendant, Belmont University, be ordered
to grant a fair, open hearing to the plaintiff, Diana. Also,
that the plaintiff be supplied with the student feedback evaluations
she had requested and that had been denied to her.
Al was an intelligent work-horse of an attorney. At 57, he took
his legal duties seriously. His heavy glasses with their
thick rims gave him a scholastic air. All that was needed
to complete the image of absent minded professor was a pipe.
Pages:
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283