Bernier v. Massachusetts

How courts have described this case

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

• raising issue for first time in reply brief insufficient to preserve issue for review
• \[W]e call to the attention of the bar once again the [affidavit] requirement of the Rule\
• “casual statement” cannot serve to preserve issue on appeal where it is contained in neither statement of issues on appeal nor argument section of brief
• parties required to file affidavit stating what information is sought, how it would preclude judgment and why it has yet to be obtained
• “Compliance with that provision by a party opposing summary judgment on Rule 56(f)[, Fed.R.Civ. P.,] grounds will also facilitate supplying the district court with the information needed to rule on the Rule 56(f)[, Fed. R.Civ.P.,] motion.”
• a “casual statement” cannot serve to preserve an issue on appeal where it is contained in neither the statement of issues on appeal nor the argument section of the brief

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).