Opinion ID: 1249167
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Lead Opinion's Position

Text: The lead opinion's discussion of the preclusion issue is both dictum  language unnecessary to the holding  and irrelevant to the issue before the court. Concluding that we are not ... free to decide the case on the issue of preclusion [4]  having neither granted review, ordered briefing, nor entertained argument of that issue  the lead opinion turn[s] next to the merits [5] and decides them. What, then, is the preceding discussion entitled  Preclusion ? It is no more than the author's dissertation on the question of preclusion, uninformed by briefing [6] or argument. At the risk of compounding the error of a process that I believe is procedurally improper, I think it necessary to respond to the lead opinion's dicta with some of my own. The reader wishing to quickly get to the only issue before the court and decided by it is advised to begin at Part B of this dissent.