On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Aaron Goldfein <[email protected]> wrote: > The actual judgement on the case is not what I'm getting at here, as > it is rather trivial. The purpose of this appeal is to challenge the > process of judges discharging their duties and deliberately assigning > inappropriate opinions on cases. Inappropriately discharging your > duties violates a SHOULD requirement in this way, and, while it is not > strictly speaking illegal, I am putting forth this case to attempt to > maintain the significance of SHOULDs.
FWIW, you also violated the SHOULD in R2205 (as did I) by not providing "such arguments and/or evidence relevant to that case as e is reasonably able to collect".
