On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 13:34, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > comex wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I could record this in the database as three separate assigns (similar >>> to appeal panels, a holdover from the old justices / appellate judges >>> system) but I'm concerned that it might confuse some of the scripts. I >>> recommend the following instead (the case can still be appealed): >> >> I have to say I disagree with preventing interesting rule changes due >> to arbitrary technical limitations...can't you fix the scripts? > > I could, but I also think requiring a panel for all such cases is > overkill; not all of them will be controversial, and (again) those > that are can be unilaterally appealed by any party. > To save the work of re-programming scripts we could just escalate these cases to the Appeals court directly.
BobTHJ
