tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3441020117205433950.post2722064007766059031..comments2023-11-04T23:31:40.392-10:00Comments on got windmills?: GUARD DOG AND YAPPERSAndy Parxhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15398587036690312685noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3441020117205433950.post-61513687014371468542009-03-17T19:45:00.000-10:002009-03-17T19:45:00.000-10:00Thank you, Andy. I couldn't help but also seeing ...Thank you, Andy. I couldn't help but also seeing the logic and line of thought of a "closed class of one" in reading the Supreme Court Decision. <BR/><BR/>Isaac Hall did use the phrase "closed class of one" but neither he nor Dep. Atty. Gen. Ginoza answered the Justices questions as to how exactly Act 2 created a "closed class of one." <BR/><BR/>From my old business law classes, I could tell by the questions of the Justices that that phrase was going to be the key to the case. I could tell that somebody had to do the grunt work to show exactly how Act 2 created a "closed class of one," and that it did not require only legal knowledge. But, it did require a complete understanding of Act 2, requiring reading and re-reading it many times, something that even Ginoza clearly did not do. It also required some additional industry research to show how the definitions, content, and timeframes of Act 2 in fact created "a closed class of one."<BR/><BR/>It is refreshing to see that the Supreme Court Justices either independently or otherwise picked up on the same line of thought logic, verified it, and further developed it with references from the confidential Harbors Operating Agreement that I did not have access to.<BR/><BR/>I appreciate, Andy, that you recognize what happened. <BR/><BR/>Aloha, BradMauibradhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16759237357642699345noreply@blogger.com