United Western Bancorp Inc (fka UWBKQ)

[AZCowboy]

... Colorado Appeals Court "Protocol" ...

Thanks Trade for the Welcome .... Yep, I've been quiet for awhile, since its all about the wait & see over on WAMU ..

Anyhew, I was not familiar with specifics for the State of Colorado so I looked them up ... Seems to me it is all quite normal with the "Three Judge Panels" and all ....... similar to Arizona ...

I found this following posted section interesting ... "Case Adjudication" so I separated it out from the link ...

There is also a section that says there is quite a large percentage of cases that are settled ..

Anyway, after reading some of the "protocols" these "clowns" were idiots to allow this case to get to this level ... just sayin .. typical of the seizing entity .... duh !

AZ

http://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Court_Of_Appeals/Protocols.cfm

Case Adjudication

The assigned judge is responsible for preparation of a "predisposition memorandum" directed to the other two panel members. This document, known as a PDM, can take numerous forms, although it typically is written in draft opinion form and contains a proposed disposition of the case.

The PDM is drafted by each judge with the assistance of his or her law clerk after review of the briefs, trial court or administrative agency decision and relevant portions of the record. Although there are situations in which the entire record must be reviewed, as when the appellant alleges insufficient evidentiary support for the trial court disposition, typically the briefs, if well written, will direct the judges to the specific areas of the record that must be reviewed.

PDMs are circulated to the other panel members the Friday before the scheduled sitting, which is typically on a Monday or Tuesday. Each judge is responsible for at least two PDMs for each sitting, with the seventh case being rotated each sitting to a different judge of the panel. Thus, there are always two, and sometimes three PDMs prepared by each judge and his or her chambers every two weeks. This means that each judge, after completing his or her PDMs, will then be responsible for reading the briefs, pertinent law and, if necessary, portions of the record in four to five other cases prior to argument.

All PDMs are tentative, as is authorship. It is only after argument and review during conference, after each panel member has read all of the briefs and such parts of the record as each judge deems necessary and has conducted independent research, that a determination is made. When cases are scheduled for oral argument, the PDM serves to provide insight and focus questions for each panel member during argument. When oral argument is waived, the PDM serves a like function for discussion in conference.

The PDM may form the basis of the majority opinion. Occasionally, it may represent a dissenting view, in which case one of the remaining two panel members will write the majority opinion. It is also not uncommon for all panel members to disagree with at least part of the PDM after conference; hence, the initial author-judge may prepare one or more revised drafts before an acceptable draft is written.

On the day of the scheduled sitting, usually immediately after oral argument is complete, the panel convenes in conference to discuss all of the cases assigned for that sitting, including waived cases. At the conference, each case is discussed. Conferences can, and sometimes do, last all day. If a consensus is reached, authorship is confirmed. If no consensus can be reached at that time, the case may then be passed until a later division conference. Passed cases may require additional research, further record review or supplemental discussion before a determination is made.[/I]