Seventh Circuit practitioners beware. Federal judges Easterbrook, Posner, and Tinder will not only punish slipshod advocacy with an adverse decision, they may hold you up for ridicule in a decision with the potential to become a classic. The case is Gonzalez-Servin v. Ford Motor Company. From the decision:
The ostrich is a noble animal, but not a proper model for an appellate advocate. (Not that ostriches really bury their heads in the sand when threatened; don’t be fooled by the picture below.) The “ostrich-like tactic of pretending that potentially dispositive authority against a litigant’s contention does not exist is as unpro- fessional as it is pointless.” Mannheim Video, Inc. v. County of Cook, 884 F.2d 1043, 1047 (7th Cir. 1989), quoting Hill v. Norfolk & Western Ry., 814 F.2d 1192, 1198 (7th Cir. 1987).
The photo displayed above is included in the opinion, as is a photo of an ostrich.
HT: JVB
