==============================  CFJ 1273  ==============================

    An Appeal has been initiated with regards to CFJ 1266.

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

Caller:                                 Wes

Judge:                                  G.
Judgement:                              TRUE

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

History:

Called by Wes:                          13 Feb 2001 07:36:22 GMT
Assigned to G.:                         13 Feb 2001 07:36:22 GMT
Judged TRUE by G.:                      14 Feb 2001 05:02:55 GMT

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

Caller's Arguments:

It is our belief that this CFJ will be Judged FALSE.

Rule 1564 states the conditions under which an Appeal may be initiated.
None of those conditions are satisfied with regards to the Appeal of
CFJ 1266.

A Dismissal is not a Judgement. Numerous Rules make it clear that
certain actions are taken upon Judgement OR Dismissal. The definitions
are mutually exclusive, as well. A CFJ which is Dismissed need not
be Judged. A previous Judgement upheld this view as well, if we
recall correctly, but we do not have the CFJ in question at hand.

While Rule 1694 describes the results of the Appeal of a Dismissal,
it does not provide the legal means to actually initiate the Appeal
in question. It only enumerates the results of such an action, should
this theoretical action be taken somehow. Much like a Rule describing
the effects of a Win, but with no currently defined Win Conditions.

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

Caller's Evidence:

Rule 1564/9 (Power=1)
Initiating Appeals

      The Judgement entered in any CFJ by its Judge, the grant or
      denial of any Motion, and the execution of any Judicial Order
      are all subject to review on appeal to a Board of Appeal.  In
      addition, a Board of Appeal shall review any claim that a Judge
      has failed to perform any duty of a Judicial nature which e was
      required to perform.

      In all cases, the insistence of any three Players, posted in the
      Public Forum, is sufficient to initiate the appeal of a
      particular matter.  In the case of the appeal of a Judicial
      Order, the insistence of any Player bound by the Order is
      sufficient.  In the case of a Judgement which convicts a Player
      of a Crime, the insistence of the convicted Player is
      sufficient.

      In each cases before a Board of Appeal, it shall collectively
      decide whether to affirm or to reverse the matter under appeal,
      and shall execute whatever Appellate Orders are necessary to
      enforce its determination.

Rule 1694/0 (Power=1)
Appeal of a Dismissal

      If the dismissal of a CFJ is Appealed, the Board shall not
      consider the truth or falsity of the original CFJ; they
      shall only consider whether the dismissal was properly
      made. An illegal dismissal shall not be considered
      "properly made."

      If the Board finds the dismissal to have been properly
      made, the original Judge of the CFJ shall retain eir
      Judicial Salary, and the CFJ shall remain dismissed.

      If the Board finds the dismissal to have been made
      improperly, the original Judge of the CFJ shall have eir
      Judicial Salary revoked. The CotC shall reassign the CFJ
      to a new Judge in the same fashion as originally
      assigned; the new Judge cannot dismiss it for the same
      reasons as given by the original Judge.

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

Judge G.'s Arguments:

The Caller claims that Rule 1564 supplies no method for initiating the
appeal of a Dismissal, as Dismissal is not Judgement.  I do not attempt to
judge whether or not Dismissal is Judgment.  If Dismissal is Judgement,
then the Caller's Argument is trivially invalid, and my correct judgement
would also be TRUE.

If, on the other hand, Dismissal is NOT Judgement, it must be determined
that it can be Appealed.  Rule 1694 strongly implies that it may be, but
does not explicitly state this fact.  However, a key phrase is extracted
here from the first paragraph of Rule 1564 (Initiating Appeals):

  "In addition, a Board of Appeal shall review any claim that
   a Judge has failed to perform any duty of a Judicial nature
   which e was required to perform."

If a Dismissal is not Judgement, as claimed by the Caller, then a Judge,
by improperly Dismissing a CFJ, has failed to perform a duty of a Judicial
nature: namely, delivering Judgement on a justiceable statement.  This is
clearly one of the "particular matters"  that the insistence of any three
players may initiate.

Three players insisted, in PF, that when the original Judge of 1266
Dismissed the case, in the words of Rule 1564, e failed to perform [a]
duty of Judicial nature which e was required to perform.  Therefore, an
Appeal of CFJ 1266 has been initiated.  Therefore, I judge CFJ 1273 to be
TRUE.

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