Thank goodness for the right of appeal. However, the litigant should be made aware that, although the appeals process can be most helpful to an appellant, the appeal is not always a saving grace for your case. Your appeal could sour. [see, Chapter 14: The Appeal, from the book UNDERSTANDING THE LAW: A PRIMER, (2008), by Attorney Charles Jerome Ware]
For example, from the WSJ.com Law Blog:
Federal appellate judge Richard Posner, widely considered one of the sharpest minds and wits in the federal judiciary, ruffled some feathers recently when in a legal opinion he compared a Houston appellate lawyer to an ostrich.
The insult was directed at David "Mac" McKeand, who is representing a group of Mexican citizens in one of many lawsuits over car wrecks allegedly caused by defects in Bridgestone and Firestone tires installed on Fords in Latin America. Judge Posner, in upholding a lower court's decision to dismiss the case, accused Mr. McKeand of ignoring legal precedent in arguing that the case belonged in U.S. rather than Mexican courts.
"The ostrich is a noble animal, but not a proper model for an appellate advocate," wrote Judge Posner, who sits on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago.
For good measure, he illustrated the ruling with photos of an ostrich and a man in a suit with their heads buried in the sand, a flourish some in the legal profession said went too far.
Others praised Judge Posner for taking a stand.
Mr. McKeand, for one, thought the ruling was "beneath [Judge Posner's] high level of jurisprudence." The lawsuit belonged in the U.S. because Mexican courts refused to hear similar cases involving foreign defendants such as Ford and Firestone, he said. "In light of all the facts, I can only wonder who really is the ostrich," Mr. McKeand said.
No comments:
Post a Comment