Appellate Practice

Court Crafts 'Dangerous Quadriplegic' Doctrine Despite 'Pigs Fly' Dissent

A California Court of Appeal majority has crafted what Legal Blog Watch is calling the “dangerous quadriplegic” doctrine, citing a 22-year-old newspaper article about a disabled man who allegedly shot his bride by using his mouth to pull a string tied to the trigger as justification for its refusal to release a wheelchair-bound inmate on humanitarian grounds.

The dissent in Martinez v. Board of Parole Hearings (PDF) argued in vain that such incidents are rarities and that “with the help of a good Internet search engine, you can prove anything, including that pigs can fly,” writes Bruce Carton. The dissenting judge had to go back only a few months to find a United Kingdom newspaper article referencing airborne porkers propelled by a trampoline.

Hat tip: Above the Law and Lowering the Bar.

Man Convicted of Being Naked at Home Wins Appeal of Indecent Exposure Case

Now Practicing Law, 2 Ex-NFL Players Have Won Some $100M in Football-Related Worker's Comp Awards

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy. Flag comment for moderator.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.