blacksox said:
91AggieLawyer said:
So I read the 5th COA "opinion" on this, which denied the Gov's mandamus request to ***** slap Clay Jenkins. It actually said, "we find the DISSENTING opinion... persuasive."
I have read TENS of thousands of legal cases. Probably from most of, if not all, the 50 states and all federal circuits. I have NEVER, EVER seen a sentence (or a thought expressed) like that. It was clear that the 3 judges had one thing on their mind: a win for Jenkins and Dallas County.
Abbott needs to call a special session and remove this power from these local officials. It is being abused.
In the tens of thousands of cases you've read, you've never seen a court adopt the dissenting opinion of a three-judge panel in a sister court? Really? Cause that's like a crazy statistical anomaly.
Read what I said again.
I've had cases (of my own) at all levels (trial and appellate) where judges did exactly what they wanted to. They ignored the law, made up their own, or, in your words, adopt whatever opinion they wanted to in order to reach the conclusion they wanted.
What I said was I've never seen them actually put it in writing. Edit: To be even more clear (since some are missing my point), or to put it another way, yes, in legal briefing you "rip off" dissenting opinions all the time. But you never make actual reference to them because it gives the court (in the case of attorneys filing a brief) or a higher court (in the case of an opinion) a very good reason/excuse to deny or reverse your ruling. Instead of making references to the dissent, you argue the basis that the dissent was on. I haven't read the EP court, but I have my doubts (after reading the Dallas decision) that it has much in the way of sound law. Why wouldn't they simply use the authority the EP dissent used (that was rejected and not reviewed by the TSC, by the way)? Oh, and the EP judges don't exactly owe their offices to a bunch of Trump supporters, but that's a side issue.
I quit doing litigation because of judges. I have ZERO faith in them. But I'm amazed that the ones on this court are brazen (or dumb) enough to say that out loud.