I saw an interesting item in the Wall Street Journal Law Blog today.
Chief Judge Kozinski of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit appears to have invented a whole new type of opinion.
Everyone has heard of majority opinions, dissents, and concurrences.
But what does one do when the opinion of the en banc court is hopelessly fractured, and one does not even think the court asked the right question, let alone managed to divine the correct answer.
Do what Chief Judge Kozinski did.
After the jump, the simplicity of "Going Vinny."
There is a certain grace and dignity in simplicity. And honestly, who really counts noses when the court issues an alphabet soup of competing opinions.
So rather than issue an opinion that "concurred in part and dissented in part" to various bits and bobs written by the other judges, Chief Judge Kozinski just issued an opinion denominated as "disagreeing with everyone."
Ah, clarity.
The WSJ Blog ponders what exactly to call such an opinion. I think we should call it, "Going Vinny," as in the famously economical opening statement given by Vinny Gambini in the film "My Cousin Vinny."
"Everything those guys just said is B*llsh#t.
"Thank you."
Just don't try it in a motion for rehearing.
Thank you.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
