[Defendant] wants it both ways, it wants to convince this Court to change its own opinion that the lease agreement could in and of itself be a violation of the Act, and at the same time deny Plaintiff evidence to establish the overall corporate mindset and practice of utilizing the leases with its optometrists, all in the hope of being able to argue to this Court and undoubtedly the []Circuit Court of Appeals, that [Plaintiff] has not produced any evidence to establish the requirements for class certification, all the while having attempted to prevent her from acquiring such evidence from [defendant] itself.
By my estimate, this "sentence" should properly be about four. Of course, two of those four would be redundant and the remaining two would still be annoyingly verbose.
But the comma splice? Who does that? (!!?!)
No comments:
Post a Comment