November 7, 2008
"mixed" value for unpublished, nonprecedential cases
On the 'Net: Jessica Slavin (Marquette) blogs about the recent article by Amy Sloan (Baltimore), If You Can’t Beat ‘Em, Join ‘Em: A Pragmatic Approach to Nonprecedential Opinions in the Federal Appellate Courts, 86 Neb. L. Rev. 895 (2008), available on SSRN. Sloan argues that non-precedential opinions should be accorded not full precedential value, but instead should received a “mixed” treatment, i.e., that “non-precedential opinions [would be] binding unless overruled by a later panel’s precedential opinion.” She contends that giving non-precedential cases this “‘overrulable’ status” would ensure that the opinions’ precedential weight would “correspond to their position within the traditional hierarchy of federal decisional law.” Slavin makes a number of good observations about the article and concludes with a discussion of recent activity in the Wisconsin courts relevant to this issue.
November 7, 2008 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "mixed" value for unpublished, nonprecedential cases: