Comford v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that this court will deem waived “issues adverted to in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation”
• observing that it is generally “not enough merely to mention a possible argument in the most skeletal way, leaving the court to do counsel’s work” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• observing that it is generally “not enough merely to mention a possible argument in the most skeletal way, leaving the court to do counsel’s work” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• explaining that a litigant abandons an argument by not properly raising or developing it on appeal whereas they fail to preserve an argument by not raising it before the trial court
• explaining that “a hearsay objection [will not] preserve a Confrontation Clause claim”
• explaining that “a hearsay objection [will not] preserve a Confrontation Clause claim”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).