On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 6:05 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Looks like the only thing to do is overturn, which actually replaces > the judgment (and therefore contract, since contract=judgement) with > a new judgement. I think that creates a genuine conflict between R911, > which says the new judgement replaces the old one, and R2169 saying > the original one is in effect. In this case, R911 would win.
It's called a replacement judgement, but all that happens is the replacement judgement is assigned, just as if the case were reassigned, and the new judge assigned a different judgement. -root
