Previous Posts
- Fourth Circuit Rejects 1983 Claim
- COA Upholds Discovery Orders
- COA Excuses Appellant's Failure To Include In Reco...
- COA Rejects Insured's Effort To Circumvent $5,000 ...
- COA Holds That Plaintiff Need Not Move For Entry O...
- COA Reverses Res Judicata Ruling
- Appealing From The Banking Commission? If So, All ...
- NC COA Decisions Today
- NC SCT Petitions, And Perhaps Opinions, Next Week
- SCOTUS Overturns 4th Circuit, Holds Employees May ...
1 Comments:
Unfortunately, Dogwood wasn't "blockbuster" enough...Its discussion of three forms of appellate "default" was novel, but ultimately relatively unhelpful. It has long been held that jurisdictional violations are fatal (the purported 2nd version of default); this is nothing new. More critically, Dogwood has left unanswered the question of what the CoA should do (and how the SCt will review what the CoA actually does) with respect to violations that are not "substantial" or "gross." If that's truly the threshold to invoke sanctions pursuant to Rules 25 and 34, then what recourse does the CoA (and also opposing parties) have to enforce the Rules when the violations at issue are minor?
Post a Comment
<< Home