On 08/08/2011 05:17 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: > Gratuitous: scshunt was not the defendant in CFJ 3054.
Wait, what? *rereads* ... Well, I feel silly. I thought I was being careful and everything. The errors in this situation seem to just keep compounding. If remanded, I intend to discharge. I don't think there's any actual *controversy* here, just a pile of misconceptions and misunderstandings, so I'd suggest that the appeals panel overrule with prejudice.
