In two full days of testimony and argument, the plaintiffs had insisted that Mr. Simpson was still worth millions, despite all of his legal expenses.

Despite the court's comprehensive analysis, the plaintiffs insisted on appealing the decision, even after being made aware of the many substantial defects of the lawsuit.

The plaintiffs insisted that the day's developments meant little, since their suit asking the judge to declare the withholding unconstitutional is still active.

But the plaintiffs insisted that it covered only emotional distress and the reduction of property values and that they still had the right to file claims to cover their cleanup costs.

Still, the plaintiffs insist that using race is unfair.

The plaintiffs insist that the Japanese are the culprits, and that the recent Supreme Court decisions will unfairly limit meritorious claims.

The plaintiff insisted that it was the father who persistently asked for money, commenting that "such erroneous reporting could damage her reputation."

The plaintiffs in the class-action suits insist that consumers should know who does what.

The plaintiffs, a coalition called the Campaign for Fiscal Equity, insisted they were not seeking equity merely for equity's sake.

For that very reason, of course, the plaintiff will normally insist on a jury.