not for what the lawyer said, but for what he gave her (a ridiculous list of 22 witnesses and 75 motions with only 7 hrs of trial left before deliberations).
not for what the lawyer said, but for what he gave her (a ridiculous list of 22 witnesses and 75 motions with only 7 hrs of trial left before deliberations).
Because there's no way you'd get through 22 witnesses and 75 motions in 7 hours. It's just not possible, yet the Apple lawyer still presented the list. You'd think a lawyer would know that, hence why the judge made the comment about being on crack.
not for what the lawyer said, but for what he gave her (a ridiculous list of 22 witnesses and 75 motions with only 7 hrs of trial left before deliberations).