Abstract

Thomas C. Green's comment on the article "Proving Anti-Competitive Conduct in the U.S. Courtroom: The Plaintiffs' Argument in Pickett v. Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc." Vol. 2 [2004], Article 8, ignores hundreds of exhibits, thousands of data parts, extensive testimony, and resorts to name calling.

Proof is not litter, and evidence is not rank speculation. Inferences from evidence may be characterized by opposing counsel as "baseless opinion," and this is the substance of advocacy.

But the Court's first trial ruling was correctly described in the original article. Mr. Green refers not to the Court's Order entering judgment as a matter of law notwithstanding the jury's verdict, but, instead, to an Order concerning taxation of costs.

Submitted: December 2, 2004 · Accepted: December 28, 2004 · Published: December 30, 2004

Recommended Citation

Domina, David A. (2004) "Proving Anti-Competitive Conduct in the U.S. Courtroom: The Plaintiffs' Argument in Pickett v. Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc.: Response to Comment ," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization: Vol. 2 : Iss. 1, Article 12.
DOI: 10.2202/1542-0485.1106
Available at: http://www.bepress.com/jafio/vol2/iss1/art12