The Attorney General filed no brief. She is above the law.
The Town of Nantucket filed a 30 page brief with a 75 page
addendum. I'm embarrassed to offer to scan both the brief
and the addendum, and attach them into (very large) pdf files.
I haven't read either, (so why should you?)
on the theory that I will be strongest if I ignore them.
Taking the opposing arguments into account 
(even subconsciously) would weaken mine.

With respect to your penultimate e-mail: I understand the
Court doesn't want to be read to. I copied their ruling
so that I could refresh my memory and
my quotation would be impeccable. 
I expect as I speak,
to rethink my argument in the presence of the Court.

If that argument had taken place as I awoke this morning,
I would have said:

"By identifying "poor workmanship" as a specific deficiency
the Superior Court has repudiated the language.
By ignoring the provisions of G.L. 30A,
the Superior Court has repudiated the statute.
By denying judicial notice to the absurdity of the Boards findings,
the Superior Court has repudiated reality.

The Superior Court has wiped away the law.
What remains is anomie.
The Appeals Court is confronted with tabula rasa.
The Appeals Court will have to reinstitute the law, de novo,
as it sees fit, or, if it so choose, confirm the absence of law
by dismissing my appeal.
If it dismissed my appeal 
the Appeals Court would rule in effect:
the law is that there is no law,
a self-proving contradiction."

I like to write to you; 
but as for you, please enjoy this sunny windy autumn day!
I am a narcissist. I enjoy my argument. 
I'm embarrassed to inflict it on you. 
Listening to me is what judges are paid for.