I hate to burst everyone's bubble here but this headline does not properly summarize the text below it. This looks very much like a pre-trial hearing, where the judge is merely reviewing the evidence presented by the Plaintiffs to see whether it meets the burden of proof necessary to proceed to a trial. In other words, do the Plaintiffs have sufficient evidence to prove their case by a preponderance, assuming the evidence is found to be true and factual at a trial. This either clears the way for a trial to take place, it denies a trail without prejudice in case additional evidence may come to light, or it denies a trial an precludes you from bringing the same action before the court again. But in this text, they've made no such determination or finding of fact concerning any of the evidence and certainly not the conclusion that the headline attributes to the Court.

Even the first few words of the text bely the headline. "Nothing said is to diminish....", meaning that if there is anything contained within the text that should appear to cast a negative light on any evidence the Plaintiff has presented to the court thus far, that this should not be construed to mean that the Plaintiff has no case. They are telling you that, if they are denying the motion to proceed to trial, they are doing so without prejudice and are willing to entertain further evidence, or, if they are accepting the motion, that they are keeping an open mind about the evidence, not adjudicating it. It's not clear from the text whether a trial is moving forward or not because the text does not show the final decision of the court. It only shows a snippet that can be construed to fit the headline.

Whoever wrote this headline is either purposely misrepresenting what the text actually says, or they simply don't understand what they are reading.

I hate to burst everyone's bubble here but this headline does not properly summarize the text below it. This looks very much like a pre-trial hearing, where the judge is merely reviewing the evidence presented by the Plaintiffs to see whether it meets the burden of proof necessary to proceed to a trial. In other words, do the Plaintiffs have sufficient evidence to prove their case by a preponderance, assuming the evidence is found to be true and factual at a trial. This simply clears the way for a trial to take place where the court will then make a determination about the evidence. But in this text, they've made no such determination or finding of fact concerning any of the evidence and certainly not the conclusion that the headline attributes to the Court.

Even the first few words of the text bely the headline. "Nothing said is to diminish....", meaning that if there is anything contained within the text that should appear to cast a negative light on any evidence the Plaintiff has presented to the court thus far, that this should not be construed to mean that the Plaintiff has no case worthy of a trial. They are telling you that they are keeping an open mind about the evidence, not adjudicating it. They can't actually make a finding of fact on the evidence absent a trial because it has not yet been rebutted by the Defendants nor have the Defendants been given an opportunity to cross-examined any of the affiants.

Whoever wrote this headline is either purposely misrepresenting what the text actually says, or they simply don't understand what they are reading. Hopefully, in the very near future the headline will be proven correct, but right now, it's at best an overzealous interpretation of the text, or at worst it's propaganda. Don't believe the hype.