On why many decisions should be unreported

The quotation of the day:

With respect to publication of the appendix, I respectfully dissent. The disposition reached in the opinion, save in two minor aspects fully enunciated in the published portion, essentially constitutes an affirmance of the jury verdict. More importantly, the opinion clearly does not satisfy the standards normally demanded for publication, see URCA 2-16.2, and should be approached accordingly by any reader. No new law has been established or altered. We have criticized no existing law. Neither party asserted, nor did we find, any apparent conflict of authority requiring resolution. Nothing within the opinion will affect established case law or legislative history. And, relevant only to the litigants, the matter scarcely engenders overwhelming or continuing public interest.

Forests have been felled, and untold law library shelves filled, in providing paper and space to indulge legal opinions that have little interest to anyone other than the adversarial parties. This is just such an opinion.

Barnco International Inc. v. Arkla, Inc., 684 So. 2d 986 (Hightower, J. dissenting from publication of opinion).

Comments

[Stephen R. Diamond]

Of course, the standard answer to the nonpublication argument is that you can't know in advance what will turn out to be precedential for future cases; and trying to make that decision in advance usurps Legislative functions. (See link.)