Key legal question
Whether the subsidary constitutional complaint was admissible despite lacking comprehensible reasoning against the cantonal court's grounds.
Extracted holding
The complaint was inadmissible because it did not contain comprehensible reasoning and did not meet the statutory motivation requirements.
Extracted reasoning
The filing failed to address the cantonal court's reasoning and thus did not satisfy Art. 117 and Art. 106(2) LTF; the matter was manifestly inadmissible and could be decided in simplified procedure.