Court Opinion

ID: 9739971
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:24:54.531937+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:15.085111
License: Public Domain

SCHUDSON, J.
¶ 8. (concurring). I agree with the majority opinion, with one small exception. The majority indicates that "[w]e do not consider an argument mentioned only in a footnote to be adequately raised or preserved for appellate review." See Majority at ¶ 6 n.4 (quoted sources omitted). In my estimation, that is not quite correct and could be read to preclude consideration of important, footnoted arguments.
¶ 9. For various reasons, appellate briefs sometimes relegate arguments to footnotes. On some of those occasions, however, the footnote adequately develops the argument and, in some appeals, the opposing party responds. It has always been my impression that when issues have been adequately developed, we may address them, regardless of whether the parties' discussions appear in the footnotes or main texts of their briefs.
¶ 10. We should not preclude appellate review of an argument merely because the argument is "mentioned only in a footnote," unless its mere mention means that the argument has not been adequately developed. Our inquiry should focus on the argument's merits, not its location in the briefs. And, interestingly enough, in this appeal, while the majority indicates that "[w]e do not consider an argument mentioned only *342in a footnote," it goes on to do so, deciding the issue in the very next sentence. See Majority at ¶ 6 n.4.
¶ 11. Accordingly, I respectfully concur.