Well, maybe we were wrong about this happening infrequently, and we just woke up to it. Or maybe it is a new trend.
On the heels of Pfannenstiehl, in which a “reconstituted majority” vetoed the 2-judge majority who heard the case, AT v. CR is a new decision in which Justices Meade and Blake’s consensus failed, when other non-panel justices rallied with Justice Hanlon to nullify the panel majority. It is not a family law case, but, rather, a juvenile harassment case.
Again, the majority became dissenters, with Justice Blake (a veteran divorce lawyer and former Probate and Family Court Judge) writing a crisp dissent, joined by Justice Meade. Perhaps coincidentally, Justice Berry, whose minority panel view ultimately prevailed in Pfannenstiehl, voted in the rump majority that carried the day, here.
What’s going on up there at the Appeals Court?