And, if there's NO limit, then we admit there is nothing wrong with it NEVER being decided.Justice delayed is justice denied.
And, if there's NO limit, then we admit there is nothing wrong with it NEVER being decided.Justice delayed is justice denied.
And, if there's NO limit, then we admit there is nothing wrong with it NEVER being decided.
Defer to the pro(s) obviously. I'm just always surprised it takes anywhere even remotely near this long for things to proceed.
I'm not a lawyer, and I have as little to do with the court system as possible (except serving jury duty or testifying if I'm called to do so in a case) but I always heard that people were entitled to a speedy trial, which I would interpret to mean that they also have a right to a speedy result of that trial. if half a year isn't considered unreasonable, what is? Is a year unreasonable, two years? At what point does the court get smacked?
The court has a duty to decide a case properly before it. That duty is enforceable through a writ of mandamus. It will decide the case, of that I have no doubt. Honestly, it has only been six months. That is well within the bell curve
I'm not a lawyer, and I have as little to do with the court system as possible (except serving jury duty or testifying if I'm called to do so in a case) but I always heard that people were entitled to a speedy trial, which I would interpret to mean that they also have a right to a speedy result of that trial. if half a year isn't considered unreasonable, what is? Is a year unreasonable, two years? At what point does the court get smacked?
I'm not a lawyer, and I have as little to do with the court system as possible (except serving jury duty or testifying if I'm called to do so in a case) but I always heard that people were entitled to a speedy trial, which I would interpret to mean that they also have a right to a speedy result of that trial. if half a year isn't considered unreasonable, what is? Is a year unreasonable, two years? At what point does the court get smacked?
This is just pathetic.
And should they take another couple months and rule as we want, no doubt we'd be praising them for reasoned and deliberative decision.
And should they take another couple months and rule as we want, no doubt we'd be praising them for reasoned and deliberative decision.
I'm not a lawyer, and I have as little to do with the court system as possible (except serving jury duty or testifying if I'm called to do so in a case) but I always heard that people were entitled to a speedy trial, which I would interpret to mean that they also have a right to a speedy result of that trial. if half a year isn't considered unreasonable, what is? Is a year unreasonable, two years? At what point does the court get smacked?
In other words. Hurry up and wait....
It's a big case with big, difficult issues with potential for conflicts in the circuits.
This also seems to me to be the sort of case that is almost guaranteed to be appealed no matter the Fourth Circuit's findings. So they may well want to be sure all their I's are dotted and T's crossed since the Supremes are likely to see it.
I kinda thought today! End of Sept would be good for me.