When 104 Issues on Appeal Is At Least One Too Many

Here's an odd item for a Friday: "Court Tosses Appeal After Finding Lawyers Filed 'Preposterous' Number of Issues," by Melissa Nann Burke--

In an opinion published Dec. 10, [a] three-judge panel said the defendants had breached their "duty of good faith and fair dealing with the court," in part by failing to be concise in their appellate filings, as court rules require. The panel pointed to the "preposterous" number of appellate issues that [the appellant's lawyer] and his firm raised in documents submitted to the trial court -- 104 issues in all, if one doesn't count "sub-issues" that were also included.

"We can only conclude that the motive underlying such conduct is to overwhelm the court system to such an extent that the courts are forced to throw up their proverbial hands in frustration," [the judge] wrote.

"While such tactics may prove successful in other situations, we are unwilling to succumb to such chicanery and will not reward such misconduct."

Too bad for the lawyers.  With 104 issues on appeal, there must have been a reversible error in there somewhere. 

Comments

[joe]

Winston Churchill once said "This report, by its very length, defends itself against the risk of being read."