At oral argument on September 6, 2018, Appellant raised:
Plaintiff served no papers on defendant’s attorney,
a jurisdictional argument.
The Appellate Court boasted, ‘This court is known for quality workmanship…
we decide … based on facts, law, and what’s before us.
That was some first class bullshit, facts, law and what was before them!
Pure nonsense!
The panel—four judges with a century of combined legal experience—
ignored the jurisdictional flaw, ruled 19 > 26 (a basic math error—or made-up fact,
i.e. larceny by trick via omitting the crucial dates on two documents),
and found ‘Plaintiff timely moved,’ IMPOSSIBLE—the necessary communications
purported to prove timeliness were unavailable to the lower court,
neither as filings nor attachments, when it ruled.