United States v. James C. Dunkel

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “[j]udges are not like pigs, hunting for truffles” in the record that might support a party’s position
• stating that Cheek held that “judges may rebuff defenses based on erroneous constitutional beliefs (such as that the 16th Amendment was not properly ratified)”
• noting that a “skeletal ‘argument’, really nothing more than an assertion, does not preserve a claim.”
• explaining that “[j]udges are not like pigs, hunting for truffles” in the record
• explaining that “[j]udges are not like pigs, hunting for truffles” in the record
• explaining in a different context that “[j]udges are not like pigs, hunting for truffles buried in briefs”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).