U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit
Jan. 10, 2017
Perhaps cite a less disturbing decision for that precedent
Cases like Dred Scott and The Antelope should not be cited for its dictum — at least not without acknowledging their troublesome takes on the broader issues they raised. By Charles Kagay
Charles M. Kagay
Of Counsel
Complex Appellate Litigation Group LLP
Appellate Law (Certified)
96 Jessie Street
San Francisco , CA 94105
Phone: (415) 649-6700
Fax: (415) 362-1431
Email: charles.kagay@calg.com
Harvard Law School
Charles has decades of experience handling appeals that involve complex or novel legal questions and is certified by the State Bar as a California appellate specialist. Find out more about Charles and the Complex Appellate Litigation Group LLP at www.calg.com. Appellate Zealots is a monthly column on recent appellate decisions and appellate issues written by the attorneys of the Complex Appellate Litigation Group LLP.
APPELLATE ZEALOTS
Would a contemporary court condone a lottery condemning scores of people to a lifetime of slavery? Of course not. But disturbing decisions can lie hiding behind innocuous boilerplate citations.
For example, in de Fontbrune v. Wofsy, 838 F.3d 992 (9th Cir. 2016), the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals explains how federal courts should interpret foreign ...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In