Opinion
2019-CA-0247 2019-C-0795 2019-C-0796 2019-C-0845 2019-C-0851 2019-CA-0975 2019-CA-0992 2019-CA-1105
10-12-2022
JACK ADAMS v. RICK M. SUTTON RICK SUTTON v. JACK ADAMS, ET AL JACK ADAMS v. RICK M. SUTTON RICK SUTTON v. JACK ADAMS, CHARLES ADAMS, POLLY POINT IMPORTS CORP. JACK ADAMS v. RICK SUTTON RICK SUTTON v. JACK ADAMS AND MAISON ROYALE, LLC RICK M. SUTTON, INDIVIDUALLY AND DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF OF RJANO HOLDINGS, INC. AND MAISON ROYALE, LLC v. JACK ADAMS, MAISON ROYALE, LLC AND RJANO, INC. JACK ADAMS v. RICK M. SUTTON
LOMBARD, J., DISSENTS WITH REASONS
I dissent from the order of the majority rescinding the January 3, 2020 order of consolidation of this Court. Because this matter was consolidated when oral argument was held, the parties were limited to arguing for 30 minutes each. As a result of the majority's order to now unconsolidate this matter and reconsolidate it into four appeals and one writ application, the parties have been precluded from fully presenting their arguments before the Court on appeal. This result belies judicial fairness. Therefore, I respectfully dissent from the order of the majority.