explaining that appellate courts are under no obligation to review 17 unclear or undeveloped arguments
How later courts described this case
- explaining that appellate courts are under no obligation to review 17 unclear or undeveloped arguments
- reciting and applying the general rules of statutory construction to include the rule that the specific governs the general
- “[T]he disqualification of an attorney or firm, or any other sanction, based solely on a rule violation — absent sufficient proof of prejudice — • would likely exceed a district court’s jurisdiction, in that the sanction would be nothing more than a means of ‘punishing’ the attorney or firm for the violation.”
- affirming default judgment on liability based on "willful and in bad faith" non-disclosure of unfavorable evidence centrally relevant to asserted claim
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
JUDGE HARKIN, District Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
¶144 I concur with the Court’s analysis and decision as to Issues 1,2, 3,4, 6 and 7.1 concur with the Court’s analysis and decision as to Issue 5, except I do not agree with that part of the analysis which resolves the Social Security survivor benefits matter by application of the canon of construction expresio unius est exclusio alterius.