There are no special circumstances in this case that justify the use
of scarce judicial resources to resolve the appeal: it will not have a practical effect on the rights of the parties; it does not entail an important issue that might independently evade review or of which a resolution is in the public interest; and the appeal is not of jurisprudential importance.
Delta cited a section of the ruling stating that, in the allocation
of scarce judicial resources, those «with a personal stake in the outcome» should get priority.
As a result
of the scarce judicial resources, judges must make decisions about how to best use these resources if the public system wants to maintain its position as the primary system in adjudicating civil disputes and in driving the development of civil case law.
Interesting case with lots of issues for society, our profession and the (mis) use
of scarce judicial resources...
Not exact matches
«If this works it could be revolutionary: it could free up
scarce judicial resources and provide for a far less expensive dispute - resolution process,» says Winkler, principal and founder
of Winkler Dispute Resolution.
Private standing has traditionally been viewed as the best way to operate our justice system because: it prevents mere «busybodies» from using up
scarce judicial resources; it ensures contending points
of view are raised by those personally invested in the case; and it preserves the proper role
of courts and their relationship to the other branches
of government.
As it is, that motion has resulted in four years
of unnecessary litigation and an unfortunate drain on
scarce judicial resources.
But we have a concurrent obligation — to taxpayers, and more importantly to the children
of relentless litigators — to prevent embittered parents from abusing
scarce judicial resources: We need to identify those parents who just come here to fight.