The length of time it has taken from the final briefing to the scheduling of oral argument may be due to a couple of factors. In California, many of the courts are backed up due to budget cuts, layoffs and furloughs. Some courts are worse than others. I would not expect that the impact on the appellate courts would be as severe as on the lower courts. I would hope that the wait of over one year is more an indication that the appellate court’s research attorneys and the assigned justices have required this time to be adequately prepared--not for oral argument, which usually takes less than half an hour, but to render a just opinion. The stakes are high for all involved, including the Court.
In its Opening Appellants’ Brief, Watchtower raised the stakes by invoking constitutional issues to set up an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court should the California Court of Appeal render an unfavorable opinion. For my money, Rick Simons defeats this strategy effectively in his Respondent’s Brief. Additionally, there is no certainty that the U.S. Supreme Court would accept Watchtower’s case for consideration
Even a favorable opinion from the Court of Appeal may not be so favorable for Watchtower in the long run. A favorable opinion will inform those lawsuits waiting in the wings, especially the California lawsuits. Complaints can be amended and strategies revised.
Thanks to dear Candace, we are at a point where existing laws are for the first time being tested as to their application to Watchtower’s policies and policy implementation. An evolutionary process has begun that will involve many more cases to come and will likely take much time. In my opinion, this is just one more vital area where time is not on the side of Watchtower.