Re: DIS: Proto: The Supreme Court

2011-11-09 Thread Ed Murphy
Yally wrote:

 Supreme cases are a subclass of appeal cases.

The specific word subclass potentially runs afoul of exactly one
in Rule 991.

How about expanding the panel size to five?

 An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a non-appeal case
 within the past two weeks CAN be initiated by any player with 2
 support. However, rules to the contrary notwithstanding, an appeal
 CANNOT be initiated concerning an assignment for which an appeal has
 already been initiated. An appeal concerning any assignment of
 judgement in an appeal case within the past two weeks CAN be initiated
 by any player with 4 support, but SHOULD NOT be done unless the matter
 concerns an important issue of precedent. Rules to the contrary
 notwithstanding, an appeal CANNOT be initiated concerning an
 assignment caused by a judgement in a supreme case.

I suggest bullet-pointing everything after the first notwithstanding.


DIS: Proto: The Supreme Court

2011-11-08 Thread Aaron Goldfein
This case would create a new level of appeals, The Supreme Court,
which consists of some entitled members and otherwise consists of
members that the CotC subjectively determines to be the most suited
for the case. I THINK the below proposal should properly inherit
appeals issues from appeal cases such that if the supreme court judges
REMAND/REMIT, the case simply goes back to the appeal case level
(where it could ultimately end up back with a single judge once
again).

Create a new rule, power 1.7, entitled The Supreme Court, with the
following text:

Supreme cases are a subclass of appeal cases. Whenever an appeal is
initiated concerning an assignment caused by a judgement in an appeal
case, the appeal is a supreme case. The entities qualified to be
assigned as judge of an appeal case are the judicial panels consisting
of three members, where each of the members is qualified to be
assigned as judge of the prior case and none is the prior judge.  If
possible, the CotC SHALL assign a panel that includes as many of the
following players as possible: the Speaker, the active player who last
registered longest ago, and the active player who most recently won
the game. Otherwise, the CotC SHOULD assign those judges who e
believes have the best understanding of the matter at hand.

Amend the following text or Rule 911:

An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a non-appeal case
within the past two weeks CAN be initiated by any player with 2
support.  However, rules to the contrary notwithstanding, an appeal
CANNOT be initiated concerning an assignment caused by a judgement in
an appeal case, nor an assignment for which an appeal has already been
initiated.

to read:

An appeal concerning any assignment of judgement in a non-appeal case
within the past two weeks CAN be initiated by any player with 2
support. However, rules to the contrary notwithstanding, an appeal
CANNOT be initiated concerning an assignment for which an appeal has
already been initiated. An appeal concerning any assignment of
judgement in an appeal case within the past two weeks CAN be initiated
by any player with 4 support, but SHOULD NOT be done unless the matter
concerns an important issue of precedent. Rules to the contrary
notwithstanding, an appeal CANNOT be initiated concerning an
assignment caused by a judgement in a supreme case.


Re: DIS: Proto: The Supreme Court

2011-11-08 Thread Pavitra
If a judgement-on-appeal really needs overturning that badly, a new
identical CFJ can be called.


Re: DIS: Proto: The Supreme Court

2009-11-25 Thread Ed Murphy
c. wrote:

   Clerk is a judicial case switch, tracked by the Clerk of the
   Courts, with values 'CotC' (default) and 'Justiciar'.

This would require the CotC to keep a permanent list of cases
accepted by the Justiciar (not that that's a big deal, though,
compare the Assessor's report including the last Roll Call).



DIS: Proto: The Supreme Court

2009-11-24 Thread comex
Proto: The Supreme Court (AI=2)
[Cases can be appealed to the Supreme Court, a fixed (elected) set of
three justices.  Appeal can be made by announcement but court doesn't
have to accept the appeal.  If they do, they need to address the issue
in detail.  Compared to normal appeals, the court has more flexibility
with the case, helpful for dealing with possible corruption in the
judicial system.]

Enact a Power-2 rule titled The Supreme Court with the following text:

  There are three offices known as the Court Offices:
- First Associate Justice,
- Second Associate Justice, and
- Chief Justice.

  A justice is a person who holds a Court Office.  The judicial
  panel consisting of each justice is the Supreme Court.

  Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, each Court Office is
  always Postulated.  An election for a Court Office CAN be
  initiated by any person with 3 support; if the office is filled,
  rules to the contrary notwithstanding, an election for it CANNOT
  be initiated by any other means.  When the holder of a Court
  Office comes to hold another Court Office, the former office
  becomes vacant.

Enact a Power-1.7 rule titled Special Appeal Cases with the following text:

  Special appeal cases are a subclass of judicial cases.  A
  special appeal should be called when a person believes that a
  judicial case has been unfairly resolved, and the normal appeals
  process is incapable of yielding a fair resolution.

  A person other than a justice CAN create a special appeal case
  by announcement, specifying a case to be reviewed (the original
  case), which must not be a special appeal case or appeal case.

  The only eligible judge for a special appeal case is the Supreme
  Court.  A special appeal case CANNOT be assigned a judge
  normally.  Instead, any justice CAN issue a writ of certiorari
  pertaining to the case, which causes it to be assigned to the
  Supreme Court.  A justice should issue writs of certiorari
  pertaining to cases which e thinks are especially interesting
  and important to the game, and should be dealt with in the
  Supreme Court.

  When a special appeal case is assigned a judge, the pre-trial
  phase begins.  Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, all
  questions in the original case are suspended, and cannot cease
  to be suspended except as described by this rule.

  The pre-trial phase lasts 72 hours.  During the pre-trial phase,
  all interested parties are invited to submit arguments for the
  case, which should explain all issues in the case that the
  submitter wants addressed.

  A special appeal case has a question on disposition for each
  judicial question in the original case, which is applicable at
  all times following the pre-trial phase.  The valid judgements
  for this question are the following:

  * AFFIRM: the last judgement to be assigned to the question is
assigned again, and cannot be suspended except by another
special appeal case.

  * OVERRULE with a valid replacement judgement: the replacement
judgement is assigned to the question, and cannot be suspended
except by another special appeal case.

  * DEFER: the question becomes open.

  * DEFER TO EXISTING APPEAL, valid when there is already an
appeal case concerning the question with an open question on
disposition: the original question is suspended.

  * APPEAL: the question is suspended, and, rules to the contrary
notwithstanding,  a new appeal is initiated concerning it.
(Should be combined with an action of REMAND.)

  A special appeal case also has a question on action, which is
  applicable at all times following the pre-trial phase.  The
  valid judgements for this question are as follows:

  * REMAND: no effect.

  * REASSIGN: the current judge of the original case (if any) is
recused.

  * ASSIGN TO, specifying an entity who was previously the judge
of the original case.  The current judge (if any) is recused
and e is assigned.

  * NEW CLERK: The Clerk of the original case is flipped (to
'Justiciar' if it was 'CotC', and vice versa).  The current
judge of the original case (if any) is recused.

  The appropriateness of each judgement is left to the justices'
  discretion.  Each justice should carefully consider the
  arguments and evidence submitted in a special appeal case before
  intending or supporting an intent to assign judgement, and
  provide reasonably detailed rationale for eir intent or support,
  addressing most of the issues raised in the special appeal.

  Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, an appeal case CANNOT be
  called concerning an assignment of judgement caused by a special
  appeal case.

[[Note: There