3 thoughts on “Judge’s ruling on Value Added Measure. “Arbitrary and capricious.””
Apparently a recent New York case (you don’t include any info about where or when the case was decided, but the opinion excerpt cites New York case law).
The Judge starts this mini-analysis (two pages of 12) by saying Petitioner bears the burden of proof, but then concludes by saying the Respondent “failed to explain”, etc. Seems he changed horses somewhere mid-stream, but doesn’t explain how that happened.
Pretty tough to tell what this is about when you omit the first ten pages, but looks to me like the Judge can’t keep his eye on the ball.
Incidentally, you are being deceptive when you headline that the judge ruled the Value Added Measure is “arbitrary and capricious”. Again – hard to tell what he IS saying, but the most he says is that Respondent’s case failed to justify the application of the standard to Petitioner’s specific case. He says nothing (in these two pages, at least) about the Value Added Measure itself.
Fred Klonsky 
Apparently a recent New York case (you don’t include any info about where or when the case was decided, but the opinion excerpt cites New York case law).
The Judge starts this mini-analysis (two pages of 12) by saying Petitioner bears the burden of proof, but then concludes by saying the Respondent “failed to explain”, etc. Seems he changed horses somewhere mid-stream, but doesn’t explain how that happened.
Pretty tough to tell what this is about when you omit the first ten pages, but looks to me like the Judge can’t keep his eye on the ball.
Incidentally, you are being deceptive when you headline that the judge ruled the Value Added Measure is “arbitrary and capricious”. Again – hard to tell what he IS saying, but the most he says is that Respondent’s case failed to justify the application of the standard to Petitioner’s specific case. He says nothing (in these two pages, at least) about the Value Added Measure itself.
You did read this before posting it, didn’t you?
Do you understand how links work?
Arbitrary implies an Arbiter …
The game is never about the quality of the measure — it’s who gets to measure the quality.