The Continuing Argle-Bargle
In last week's opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, the U.S. Supreme Court again broke new ground and has taken an action that will be debated for years to come. It finally used the word "huh?" in an opinion. This of…
In last week's opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, the U.S. Supreme Court again broke new ground and has taken an action that will be debated for years to come. It finally used the word "huh?" in an opinion. This of…
As you likely know by now, the Supreme Court has voted 6-3 to reject a challenge to the Affordable Care Act a.k.a. Obamacare, over a strong dissent by Justice Scalia. The opinion in King v. Burwell involves important issues of…
In a Facebook post, Tamah Jada Clark, the author of the now-legendary pleading entitled “To F— This Court And Everything That It Stands For,” expresses puzzlement as to why that pleading “has now, apparently, become a ‘big deal.’” She also suggests that “there is…
Pretty self-explanatory, but I’m going to explain it anyway.
Appalling.
Here are some words & phrases that you really don't want a judge to apply to anything you file: sprawling behemoth surplusage larded with brims with masquerading as voluminous breathtaking madness chokes the docket intended to overwhelm labyrinthian prolixity of…
Way, way, way updated.
Here's a more interesting decision by the Supreme Court, although maybe "decision" is the wrong word. The question is: if your client insists on filing something that is complete gibberish, do you have to agree, or do you have an…
In which I give this way more attention than it probably deserves.
"Few statutes have proven as enigmatic as 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)," says the Tenth Circuit to kick off its opinion in United States v. Rentz. Hard to see what it's complaining about: (c) (1) (A) Except to the extent that a…