Apple e-book judge Cote makes short work of Apple’s list of nine evidentiary ‘errors’

“I was curious how Judge Denise Cote would deal with nine evidentiary issues Apple says it will raise in its appeal of her ruling last month (pdf here) that the company was the ringleader of an illegal conspiracy to fix the prices of e-books,” Phillip Elmer-Dewitt repots for Fortune.

“Judge Cote had asked Apple to supply her with a list of evidence that the company believes was ‘improperly admitted, excluded, or disregarded’ during the trial,” P.E.D. reports. “Apple supplied a list of nine items last week, and at a hearing Friday the judge whipped right through them.”

P.E.D. writes, “If you skip over the footnotes and references, I think you’ll get flavor of the way this judge conducts herself when challenged in court.”

Read more in the full article here.

Related articles:
U.S.A. v. Apple: Apple faces possible May 2014 trial on e-book damages – August 15, 2013
le-in-e-books-case/”>In pretrial view, judge says leaning toward U.S. DOJ over Apple in e-books case – May 24, 2013
Lawyers have complained for years that Judge Denise Cote pre-judges cases before she enters the courtroom – August 14, 2013


  1. From the review section at The Robing Room, a place where lawyers rate judges before whom they have appeared:

    “As several commenters have noted, this judge pre-determines which parties should win at the outset, and is blatantly enamored of big-name firms and gov’t entities. Engages in legal contortions to reach outcomes on behalf of her pet party, even to the extent of ignoring applicable black-letter law… God help us all if she is elevated to the Second Circuit.”

  2. She is a paid off pawn of the D.O.J. She said before the trial started that Apple was guilty and did not consider any evidence or testimony from Apple and went on with her predetermined guilty verdict. Paid off troll that has no business in a courtroom. Hopefully once the appeal court judge actually puts Apple’s testimony and evidence in consideration the way most people see it, Apple will be the victor and rightfully so.

  3. Cote’s rebuttal to Apple’s eighth point says it all.
    “COURT: I don’t think I need to say more about paragraph eight, which is the issue about Google and Amazon credibility. I found those witnesses credible in any pertinent part to the facts at issue.”

  4. Judge Cote is so ignorant that she does not even know the proper use of the word principle. She twice uses that word when the word she needed is PRINCIPAL. She needs to repeat the 6th grade. Then we’ll talk about a legal career.

  5. I respectfully withdraw my earlier contentions that “suggestions” of how to rule were given to her and her discomfort with such manuvering caused her to pre-announce her decision.

  6. The eBook crime versus the Wall St crime.
    Wall St got immunity even though USA got an extra $5 trillion debt. A thousand jobs were saved yet Main St USA went to the poor house and its not ended yet with debt increasing daily.

    Yet Apple’s eBook crime was to make a profit and not like Amazon (in making a {unsustainable in the long run}loss) to take monopolistic eBook control against the laws of USA. And no where in the case is Amazon’s crime against USA laws, Economic laws and public good referenced.

    It is the end of USA as a law abiding state when criminals get immunity walk free and those that do no want to go bankrupt are labeled criminals by the DoJ.

  7. The worst part of USA law and trials is plea bargening.

    In the eBook case 6 publishers said they were guilty to save money. This was a error. The Arabs do the sane to westerners and then throw the book at them. The publishers should have spoken to Apple and co-defended the case with Apple — it would have been cheaper for them if they had and the conditions they were given would not change as they have today with the guilt conditions that Apple has to endure and themselves.

  8. Here’s What Crudele of NY Post thinks …….

    The problem with our government’s prosecutions of financial wrongdoers is that authorities never go after anyone big. It’s tough when these big shots make campaign contributions that help put the prosecutors’ bosses in office.

    Yesterday, US Attorney Preet Bharara indicted two people in JP Morgan’s London Whale scandal. But he indicted guppies and didn’t even include the whale, Bruno Iksil.

    I don’t know about you, but I want to see some higher-ups put in shackles. Up until now, Washington has been content with making companies pay big fines while their execs get off to loot and pillage another day.

    Jail ’em! That is, if you want to restore confidence in the legal system and the financial markets.


Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.