Quintero v. Rogers (CA1 5/12/09)

When courts do something like this, shouldn’t they mention it? Life is confusing enough.

The court issued an opinion on this one in November; we discussed it here. A motion for rehearing resulted in this new opinion, which differs from the old in ways you may spot if you use a magnifying glass (the holdings and dispositions are the same in both.) Nowhere does the court mention that this is its second try. It removed the first opinion from its online Opinion Index instantly (though its control over Lexis, etc., is slower). Maybe the court thinks that nobody except the parties will remember having read it before.  Our problem was that we kinda did, and had to go hunting through the databases to make sure that what our partners say about our mental state wasn’t true after all.

How about a footnote, gang, to let us older folks know that we’re not losing our minds?