|
|
|
|
||
Once Apple III Reaches The CAFCGiven the convoluted, torturous and duplication of effort filled route VHC has taken to the CAFC, it is not unreasonable to hope that a one page affirmation, the so-called Rule 36 decision can be had. A Rule 36 judgment can be entered without an opinion when it is determined by the panel that any one of five conditions exist and a written opinion would not have precedential value. The five conditions are: The judgment, decision, or order of the trial court appealed from is based on findings that are not clearly erroneous. The evidence supporting the jury’s verdict is sufficient. The record supports summary judgment, directed verdict, or judgment on the pleadings. The decision of an administrative agency warrants affirmance under the standard of review in the statute authorizing the petition for review. A judgment or decision has been entered without an error of law. Historically, if nothing else, a Rule 36 decision is wrought one-third of the time as are non-precedential and precedential decisions. A Rule 36 decision is more than likely to put paid to the race to finality under the Fresenius v Baxter decision. That in turn will enable Ming to put in that much anticipated swimming pool behind the cardboard box in the salutary shape of a dollar sign. One supposes that the status seeking Ming should then probably even learn to swim. |
return to message board, top of board |
Msg # | Subject | Author | Recs | Date Posted |
143169 | Re: Once Apple III Reaches The CAFC | dfwl28 | 3 | 1/20/2018 9:42:33 PM |
143210 | Re: Once Apple III Reaches The CAFC | valuationguy | 1 | 1/22/2018 9:23:02 AM |