Originally Posted by
FlyingUnderTheRadar
What evidence? If evidence related to the nudi scope then that is correct - it should not have been heard. If evidence related to why he should be able to file in FL rather than in DC that is a different matter.
Issue is one of jurisdiction not of the merits of his complaint. Corbett wanted it in the 11th Circuit Court so that the case could be heard by a jury. Corbett evens says that:
“That’s the bad news. The good news is that the fight is not over. It simply must be continued without that jury, and with discovery and witnesses allowed to me at the discretion of the 11th Circuit.”
Corbett will refile in DC and continue his fight.
I think perhaps there was some confusion over the role of an appellate court when they have original, as opposed to appellate, jurisdiction. Typically, in the case where they are serving as an appellate court, the only evidence they will consider is evidence as to the lower court's error. However in the case where they have original jurisdiction, they will hear evidence of the issue, though it sounds like it will be handled differently than if presented to a lower court with original jurisdiction (such as no jury).