Judicial dicta enough.
Sorry, even that did not quite get “judicial dicta” off my mind.
Robert G. Scofield’s article in Los Angeles Lawyer, The Distinction Between Judicial Dicta and Obiter Dicta, is built around a single California case, People’s Lumber Co. v. Gillard, 5 Cal App 435, 90 P. 556 (1907). The article seems intended to lead the lawyers of Los Angeles to believe that People’s Lumber stands for a broadly applied and near-universally held principle which denominates dicta grounded in fully-argued, demonstrably careful judicial deliberation as “judicial dicta” and privileges these “judicial dicta” with near binding authority. But that belief would be mistaken.