Bank of Mendocino v. Baker

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• deeming portions of ineffective-assistance-of-counsel argument abandoned when several claims were “not supported by specific citation or argument” in violation of Ga. Supreme Court Rule 22
• deeming portions ofineffective-assistanceof-counsel argument abandoned when several claims were “not supported by specific citation or argument” in violation of Supreme Court Rule 22
• deeming portions of ineffective-assistance-of-counsel argument abandoned when several claims were “not supported by specific citation or argument” in violation of Supreme Court Rule 22
• remanding for consideration of a claim 72 that the habeas court “explicitly declined to also address”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).