One thing struck me in the order dismissing the ballot challenge, Liberty Legal Foundation v. National Democratic Party of the U.S.A. The judge, before dismissing the case, had some harsh words about a submission of supplemental authority from the Plaintiffs’ attorney, Van R. Irion. What he said was that the brief was really a sur-reply, something that is usually not allowed under the rules. Judge Anderson wrote:
The Court finds that Plaintiffs’ Motion is not well-taken. Even though Plaintiffs label the brief they seek leave to file a “supplemental response,” Plaintiffs are in fact seeking leave to file a sur-reply. As many courts have noted, “[s]ur-replies . . . are highly disfavored, as they usually are a strategic effort by the nonmoving party to have the last word on a matter.”
Sur-replies are allowed sometimes when the Defense raises a new legal argument or submitted new evidence, something Judge Anderson said was not the case in LLF.
Jerry Collette is also working on a document he calls “Supplemental Brief in Opposition to Motions to Dismiss.” Depending on when it is submitted and when the Defense files their reply, this might be a sur-reply too. In any case, the Defense gets the last word. I wonder if Jerry has a dollar figure in mind of how much he has damaged the Florida Democratic Party with his frivolous lawsuit.