Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2696a

=================  Appeal 2696a (Interest Index = 1)  ==================

Panelist:                               Tiger
Decision:                               REMAND

Panelist:                               G.
Decision:                               REASSIGN

Panelist:                               Yally
Decision:                               REASSIGN

========================================================================

History:

Appeal initiated:                       20 Oct 2009 17:18:17 GMT
Assigned to Tiger (panelist):           03 Nov 2009 01:14:21 GMT
Assigned to G. (panelist):              03 Nov 2009 01:14:21 GMT
Assigned to Yally (panelist):           03 Nov 2009 01:14:21 GMT
G. moves to REASSIGN:                   03 Nov 2009 01:25:50 GMT
Tiger moves to REMAND:                  03 Nov 2009 14:07:59 GMT
Yally moves to REASSIGN:                03 Nov 2009 21:10:23 GMT
Final decision (REASSIGN):              03 Nov 2009 21:10:23 GMT

========================================================================

Appellant ais523's Arguments:

I intend, with 2 support, to appeal this. Without being able to see coppro's
reasoning, I have no idea whether eir judgement is correct or not, and
therefore no basis upon which to decide whether to appeal or not. The same
applies to everyone else here. As a result, the judgement needs to be
appealed in case it's setting an undesirable precedent. (In addition, this
verdict could conflict with other verdicts that have not yet been made; the
reasoning would be needed to determine that, too.)

========================================================================

Panelist G.'s Arguments:

What will happen is I'll consider it an annoying way to waste the Court's
time and opine REASSIGN.

========================================================================

Panelist Tiger's Arguments:

I opine REMAND, to give the Judge a chance to explain eir reasoning.

========================================================================

Gratuitous Arguments by G.:

[if previous attempt ineffective]

I consider the behavior of a judge purposely withholding critical 
arguments from a case to be pointlessly annoying and not at all 
deserving of a remand.  I opine REASSIGN in CFJ2696a.

========================================================================