On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > R2157 refers to an agreement to deliver a legal opinion. In the absence of > further definition of "binding", it is quite likely that agreeing to consent > to the posting of such an opinion is binding. This particular type of > agreement > is made under R2157 so it is not unreasonable to say it is binding under the > rules. Even without that, see CFJ 1325, in particular the judge's point (2) > of > what constitutes "intent that an agreement be binding", this is still quite > relevant as "binding" is similarly defined now as then. Certainly I have > intended my own agreements with others on judicial panels to be binding and > subject to R101 protections, but I can't speak for my fellow panel members, > and as CFJ 1325 suggests we can only test this if a dispute arises.
When agreeing to an appeal judgement, I have always considered myself to be reserving the right to change my mind, which can hardly be called binding. -root
