Justice Richman savages the appellants in this opinion.
He doesn't like the way they crafted their response to the moving party's separate statement of material facts below. He doesn't like the way they wrote their briefs. He doesn't seem to like much of anything about what counsel for appellants have done.
The overwhelming majority of the opinion is about the quality of the briefing, and the arguments therein, rather than on the actual merits of the case. (Though admittedly these things are intertwined. A little bit, anyway.)
It's a cautionary tale. About how to not write your separate statement of material facts. About how not to write you brief on appeal.
And about how merciless the Court of Appeal can be if you ignore the above counsel.
