On Nov 17, 2007 9:37 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > *I'm* the one still think UNDECIDED is reasonable, and I came up with > arguments supporting it which I think are perfectly fine. I think that > root should be the winner. But this judgement is an incorrect precedent. > [Side note: This is a place that a Concurrent Opinion would be my favored > option, if it still existed.]
Hmm, you know, based on a literal reading of Rule 911, any appeal judgement other than SUSTAIN is inappropriate anyway. REMAND and REASSIGN are appropriate "if there is serious doubt about the appropriateness of the prior judgement..." But the panel did not question the appropriateness of the prior judgement, only the arguments the judge used to arrive at it. -root
