RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Thanks for the Front Row Seat, HH.I would expect we'll see a decision within the next month or so. Keep in mind that the judges still need to write their associated legal opinion (amongst all their other cases) before any decision is announced.
In my view, it's hard to imagine oral arguments going any better than they did. The judges all hammered the city's attorney over and over again, who did not give explanations/arguments that seemed convincing the judges (or in their words, to even to directly address their questions!).
That being said, don't get unnecessarily overly excited:
1. Comments and questions in oral arguments often include headfakes compared to the ultimiate decision.
2. Even if DME wins in the court of appeals decision (and the current preliminary injunction is lifted), this litigation still potentially has a long way to go. Oral arguments today made clear that there are other potential claims (trespass, nuisance, etc.) that were not addressed by the trial court or the oral argument today. The city could still try to make trouble for DME with those other claims, even if ultimately meritless (especially if the trial judge remains as friendly to the city as she apparently was in graning the initial preliminary injunction).
Not trying to rain on any parades here - today's proceeding really could not have gone better for DME in my view. If we get a favorable decision, maybe the City gives up and decides that fighting further isn't worth the cost - but due to the politics I would expect the City to fight DME on this as long as it can until the very bitter end.
Regardless, I think it is just a matter of time (just more time than we might like). All the more reason to be grateful that DME has mutliple other field to be commercializing in the meantime.