To show y’all that I’m not just making up my position on “plagiarism,” I here is a quote from the U.S. Supreme Court on this very issue:
“even when the trial judge adopts proposed findings verbatim, the findings are those of the court and may be reversed only if clearly erroneous. “ Anderson v. City of Bessmer City, 105 S.Ct. 1504 (1985).
The Third Circuit, the circuit in which Judge Jones sits, also specifically recognizes that a trial court can adopt a party’s proposed findings verbatim. See Landsford-Coaldale Joint Water Authority v. Tonolli Corp., 4 F.3d 1209, 1215 (1993)(stating, “[w]e similarly reject the [plaintiff’s] argument that the district court’s verbatim adoption of many of [the defendant’s]proposed factual findings contravened the purposes of Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a) such that they do not warrant review under the clearly erroneous standard. This argument has been rejected by the Supreme Court….”)
Will those who have been trying to make political hay out of this aspect of Judge Jones’ opinion now acknowledge that they are wrong on this point?
One reply on “More on Judge Jones the (Not)Plagiarist”
Excellent post. Since I can’t comment at UD (a fate you may soon suffer) I thought I would give you kudos here.
And, no, no one at UD is going to admit they’re wrong about anything.