Dunk in pregame

[so cal lurker]

In the legal world, we often talk about controlling authority and persuasive authority. A court is bound by controlling authority (e.g., a US Supreme Court ruling on an issue of federal law). A court will carefully consider persuasive authority (e.g., a California Court will consider the logic behind a New York court ruling, but is not obligated to follow it).

It seems to me that no-longer-published cases are a form of persuasive authority: as we don't know why they left he book or what may have changed in the interim, they should not be slavishly followed; but since they were controlling at one point, they should be carefully considered before reaching a contrary conclusion.

YMMV.