Sometimes reading cases just makes me feel dirty when I see the academic dishonesty that goes on. Courts will take things out of context (much like law students, ha), manipulate language, and pick and choose “binding cases.” The best example of this is United States v. Mendoza-Gonzalez, 520 F.3d 912 (8th Cir. 2008). The court basically says that, because a district court in another circuit (a lower court that is not bound by this court’s precedent) decided one thing, and this court cited that case for a sort of related proposition in another case, the district court case became very persuasive, if not binding, law.
It just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.