• Home
  • About Me
  • Disclaimer

The Researching Paralegal

~ Articles and Research for Legal Professionals

The Researching Paralegal

Category Archives: Appellate Law

What’s The Point of An Appellant’s Reply Brief?

24 Monday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Judges, Appellate Law, Brief Writing, Judges, Legal Argument, Legal Writing

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Appeal, Appellate Briefs, Appellate court, Appellate Law, Brief Writing, Legal Argument, Reply Brief

Yes, Filing an Appellant’s Reply Brief Really is Necessary, by Mike Skotnicki, Briefly Writing Blog

http://brieflywriting.com/2014/02/03/yes-filing-an-appellants-reply-brief-really-is-necessary/

In both my prior practice of appellate law in a fairly large firm and now in my work as a freelance appellate attorney, I’ve been asked by lawyers I was working with whether it was really necessary to file an Appellant’s Reply Brief. My short answer is, ‘Only if you want to win.’

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Former Appellate Law Clerk Emphasizes Brief Writing Skills.

19 Wednesday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Alabama Supreme Court, Appellate Judges, Appellate Law, Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Judges, Legal Analysis, Legal Writing, Statement of Facts

≈ Comments Off on Former Appellate Law Clerk Emphasizes Brief Writing Skills.

Tags

Alabama Supreme Court, Appellate Judges, Brief Writing, Briefly Writing Blog, Chief Justice Sonny Hornsby, Justice Terry Butts, Legal Writing, Mike Skotnicki

The Most Important Thing I Learned on the Inside of the Alabama Supreme Court, by Mike Skotnicki, Briefly Writing Blog

http://tinyurl.com/mhq8a3m

An excellent post well worth reading. This short excerpt reminds us why quality legal writing is so critical in appellate advocacy. -CCE

[T]o win an appellate matter you must make your brief come alive, hold the reader’s attention, influence the reader to view your client favorably, and help guide the court to the result you want. With the paucity of oral argument, the appellate brief is very likely your only opportunity to present to the court the passion you hold for your client’s cause and that passion, though controlled, should be palpable. Your brief must be more like a compelling novel, telling a story of conflict, than the dry and lifeless tome that is most often submitted on appeal. If your brief is the one that the appellate judge or staff member goes back to again and again in preference to that of the opposing party as the matter is being considered, the chances of your client winning will climb immeasurably.  Sometimes having the “best” case or fact in your favor is enough for your client to win, but most appeals simply aren’t that easy. . . .

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Journalist’s Guide to the Federal Courts.

18 Tuesday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, U.S. Courts of Appeal, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Journalist’s Guide to the Federal Courts.

Tags

A Journalist's Guide to the Federal Courts, Federal Judges, Journalists, Media, United States Courts

A Journalist’s Guide to the Federal Courts, United States Courts

 http://www.uscourts.gov/News/JournalistsGuide.aspx

Federal judges and the journalists who cover them share much common ground. One clear area of mutual interest is accurate and informed coverage of federal courts. A Journalist’s Guide to the Federal Courts is intended to assist reporters assigned to court coverage. It is the media who inform and educate the public about the courts, spark discussion and debate about their work, instill public trust and confidence in the institution and its function, and help protect judicial independence. These are worthwhile and important pursuits.

There are justifiable and distinct differences between the three branches of government and the access they grant the news media. Most of the work of federal courts is performed in open court and decisions, and in most cases court filings are available on the Internet. This primer is aimed at helping reporters who cover federal appellate, district, and bankruptcy courts – the cases, the people, and the process.

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Email Virus Running Amuck In Some Appellate Courts.

17 Monday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, Appellate Law, Emails, Legal Technology, Louisiana Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Email Virus Running Amuck In Some Appellate Courts.

Tags

1st Circuit Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, Emails, Louisiana Civil Appeals Blog, Louisiana Supreme Court, Malware, Raymond Ward, Virus

A virus going around, by Raymond Ward, Louisiana Civil Appeals Blog

http://tinyurl.com/kv5owgc

There must be a virus going around. Recently the Louisiana Supreme Court and the First, Third, and Fifth Circuits have published warnings about malicious e-mails purporting to come from those courts. . . .

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

DOJ Warns Louisiana Supreme Court To Stop Civil Rights Abuse of Bar Applicants.

17 Monday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Disabilities, Legal Ethics, Louisiana Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on DOJ Warns Louisiana Supreme Court To Stop Civil Rights Abuse of Bar Applicants.

Tags

ADA, Alan Childress, Alston Walker, Dane Ciolino, Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, DOJ, Lauren Michel, Legal Profession Prof Blog, Louisiana Bar Admission, Louisiana Supreme Court, Loyola

DOJ Sends Critical Letter to Louisiana Supreme Court re its Bar Admission Process, by Alan Childress, Legal Profession Prof, Legal Profession Prof Blog

http://tinyurl.com/qhryrrf

Dane Ciolino (Loyola-New Orleans, Law) has blogged on the recent letter of warning the DOJ sent the state’s supreme court and chief disciplinary counsel about the civil and disability rights of its applicants. . . .

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

How Skillful Are You At Mediation?

16 Sunday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Alternative Dispute Resolution, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Mediation, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

≈ Comments Off on How Skillful Are You At Mediation?

Tags

Above the Law (blog), Alternative Dispute Resolution, Biglaw, Gaston Kroub, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Mediation, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Beyond Biglaw: Mediation Matters (Part 1), by Gaston Kroub, Above The Law Blog

http://tinyurl.com/kv9d9ag

Mediation. For some lawyers, it is a great way to spend a day; for others, it is an interminable bore, and ineffective to boot. It is easy to imagine that lawyers who have had successful mediation experiences are more likely to fall into the former category than the latter. What is more certain, however, is that mediation skills are increasingly important for a litigator to have, for a number of reasons. . . .

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Got Your Gun? OSBI Launched Self-Defense Act License Online Application System.

16 Sunday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Constitution, Second Amendment

≈ Comments Off on Got Your Gun? OSBI Launched Self-Defense Act License Online Application System.

Tags

eGovernment, Gun Control, Handgun License, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, Online Gun License, OSBI, Second Amendment, Self-Defense Act

Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation Offers Online Gun License Application, OK.gov

http://tinyurl.com/m86brv3

Applying for an Oklahoma gun license just got easier. The Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation (OSBI) has launched the Self-Defense Act (SDA) License Online Application system. The system allows users to submit applications to apply for or renew a handgun license. The online application can be accessed on the OSBI website at http://www.ok.gov/osbi.

Last year, more than 60,000 Oklahomans applied for a gun license. To deal with the influx of applications, OSBI hired more temporary and full-time staff for the unit and added a night shift. The online application will expedite and streamline the process.

The online service is a product of a partnership between the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation and OK.gov, Oklahoma’s official website managed by the eGovernment firm, NIC Inc. (Nasdaq: EGOV). The actual launch date of the online application system was January 14, 2014. . . .

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Latest Ninth Circuit Decision on Rule 26 Discovery From Testifying Experts.

16 Sunday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Attorney Work Product, Court Rules, Court Rules, Discovery, Evidence, Expert Witness, Experts, Federal District Court Rules, Federal Rules of Evidence, Requests for Production, Rule 26, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Latest Ninth Circuit Decision on Rule 26 Discovery From Testifying Experts.

Tags

9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Chevron, Cogent Legal Blog, Court Rules, Expert Witnesses, Federal Rule 26, Michael Kelleher, Paul Hastings, Republic of Ecuador v. Mackay, Work Product Objection

Ninth Circuit Rules on Scope of Discovery from Testifying Experts, by Michael Kelleher, Cogent Legal Blog

http://tinyurl.com/knvhgv2

[A] new Ninth Circuit decision about the scope of expert discovery in federal court caught our attention. The decision in Republic of Ecuador v. Mackay, No. 12-15572 (9th Cir. Jan. 31, 2014) poses the question: where the expert has served both as a confidential advisor to counsel and as a testifying expert, may counsel withhold documents shared with the expert by asserting an opinion work product objection? The short answer is no—documents from testifying experts must be produced unless protected by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(4).

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Appellate Procedure Resource Guide for State Courts.

16 Sunday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Judges, Appellate Law, Court Rules, Courts, Intermediate Appellate Courts, Judges, Pro Se Guides, State Appellate Courts, Unpublished Opinions

≈ Comments Off on Appellate Procedure Resource Guide for State Courts.

Tags

Appellate ADR, Appellate Case Management, Appellate Judges, Appellate Procedure, Appellate Procedure Resource Guide, Filing Fees, Intermediate Appellate Courts, National Center of State Courts, Pro Se Appeal Guides, Statistics and Trends, Unpublished Opinions

Appellate Procedure Resource Guide, National Center of State Courts

http://www.ncsc.org/Topics/Appellate/Appellate-Procedure/Resource-Guide.aspx

There is a plethora of information here. It is diverse and abundant. Once you arrive at the website, please take your time and browse each section. Please do not overlook the button to the far right for “Companion Sights.” -CCE

The most common structure for a state appellate court system involves one court of last resort with largely discretionary review, commonly called a supreme court, and one intermediate appellate court with largely mandatory review.  Because of this jurisdiction, the intermediate appellate court is the court of final review for the vast majority of state court appeals. Ten states are without an intermediate appellate court. Various combinations based on mandatory versus discretionary jurisdiction, size of the courts, use of panels, geographical divisions, and division between criminal and civil jurisdiction by court exist in the state appellate systems.

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Good Advice On How to Avoid Embarrassing Mistakes In An Appeal.

16 Sunday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, Appellate Law, Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Case Law, Citations, Citations to the Record, Legal Analysis, Legal Writing, Mandatory Law, Primary Law, Proofreading, Research, Statement of Facts, Texas Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Good Advice On How to Avoid Embarrassing Mistakes In An Appeal.

Tags

Appellate Briefs, Appellate Law, Appellate Lawyer, Chad M. Ruback, Citations, Citations to the Record, Hyperbole, Justice Debra Lehrmann, Legal Writing, Proofreading, Statement of Facts, Texas Supreme Court

Common Mistakes Seen in Appellate Petitions and Briefs, by Chad M. Ruback, Appellate Lawyer

http://news.appeal.pro/appeals-to-texas-supreme-court/appellate-petitions-and-briefs/

Mr. Ruback served as a briefing attorney to the Fort Worth Court of Appeals. Here he shares the common mistakes that are normally seen in appellate writing. Because an appellate court never questions witnesses or hears evidence, the written documents submitted by the parties are all it has upon which to base its ruling. Sloppy and lengthy garbled arguments simply will not do. Mr. Ruback’s comments are worth noting.

I would like to add to Mr. Ruback’s list – neglecting to verify the accuracy of the appellate record while it remains in the jurisdiction of the trial court. It is a simple exercise to compare the record compiled by the trial court clerk using the Designation of Record and Counter-Designation of Record to make sure that the record is accurate.

This may seem a waste of time until the appellate record includes a deposition that was never admitted into evidence or a crucial piece of evidence is overlooked by the court clerk who assembled record for the appeal. No one is perfect; mistakes can happen.

Too often, counsel ignore this simple step. Personally, I would make sure the person you send to check the record put the trial exhibits together and/or was part of the trial team. Or to put it another way – how do you explain to a client that you couldl have avoided the appeal’s fatal flaw if you had checked the record before it was sent up on appeal? -CCE

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Federal Court Rejects Portland’s Panhandling Ordinance.

15 Saturday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Constitution, First Amendment, Municipal Code, Municipal Law, Panhandling

≈ Comments Off on Federal Court Rejects Portland’s Panhandling Ordinance.

Tags

Anti-Camping, First Amendment, Homeless, Mayor Charlie Hales, Muncipality, Oregon, Panhandlers, Portland, U.S. Constitution, U.S. District Judge George Z. Singal

 Our View: Rejection Of Median-Strip Panhandling Ban Right Call For Portland, Portland Press Herald

http://tinyurl.com/l6o3gdp

It is estimated that 4,000 homeless people sleep on Portland’s streets. Portland’s Mayor Charlie Hales has been taking various measures since last summer to address with Portland’s homeless situation. Mayor Hales has said he wants to crack down on homeless camps by increasing homeless shelters, but has not set any specific amount for pay for shelters.

The Mayor’s anti-camping law allows police to “sweep” homeless  on sidewalks. In a “sweep,” the police discard the homeless’ few possessions, including warm clothing and blankets, in spite of the number of homeless who have frozen to death.

Mayor Hales says this law is not about homelessness but about lawlessness. Unfortunately for Mayor Hales, his actions have galvanized grass roots protesters to head this week towards City Hall with – literally – pitchforks and torches.

To the Portland Police Department’s credit, it responded to the recent extremely cold conditions by moving people to shelter. The Fire Department also did its part to help. Normally around 1,000 shelter beds are available for the homeless, but various agencies, such as the Red Cross, provided 350 more shelter beds.

This will, I hope, give you an idea of the scope of the homeless situation in Portland, the struggle to address it, and set the stage for the case discussed in this post from the Portland Press Herald.  An ordinance forbidding panhandling purportedly to address “public safety” has been struck down by a federal judge in support of the First Amendment. -CCE

There is something disturbing about seeing men and women standing near the roadway holding signs and asking for help. It’s hard to ignore a median-strip panhandler when you are sitting in a car stopped at a red light. It makes some people feel angry, others threatened.

Moving panhandlers off the median strips did not fix any of the real problems of poverty in Portland, but neither does knocking down the ordinance that banned them. City leaders should keep working to address the real problems of homelessness and extreme poverty.

But that’s not enough to override the First Amendment to the Constitution, according to U.S. District Judge George Z. Singal. In his ruling Wednesday, Singal struck down a Portland ordinance that banned standing in median strips by pedestrians as ‘content-based restriction on free speech.’

Judge Singal saw right through the city’s claim that the goal of the ordinance was to protect public safety, correctly pointing out that the ordinance did not prohibit people from posting campaign signs on the medians, which is at least as dangerous as standing still. . . .

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Apple and Google Fighting Patent Trolls In the U.S. Supreme Court.

15 Saturday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Apple, Google, Intellectual Property, Legal Technology, Patent Law, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Apple and Google Fighting Patent Trolls In the U.S. Supreme Court.

Tags

Allcare Health Management Systems, Apple, BloombergBusinessweek, Charlene Morrow, Cisco Systems, Facebook, Google, Greg Stohr, Intel, Octane Fitness, Patent Freedom, Patent Infringement, Patent Trolls, Silicon Valley, Susan Decker, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, U.S. Supreme Court, Verizon, Yahoo

The Supreme Court Takes on Patent Trolls, by Greg Stohr and Susan Decker, Technology, BloombergBusinessweek

http://tinyurl.com/mav2rc4

Apple (AAPL) and Google (GOOG) say they’re tired of being slapped with baseless patent suits that cost them millions in legal fees. Now they’re asking the U.S. Supreme Court to let them hit back. The two are leading a group of companies urging the court to make it easier for businesses to recover legal costs when they win a patent infringement suit. In two cases to be argued this month, the justices will hear them out.

More than 100,000 businesses were threatened in 2012 by ‘patent assertion entities.’ Often derided as patent trolls, these companies get most of their revenue from licensing patents and from suing other companies for infringement. They filed 19 percent of all patent lawsuits from 2007 to 2011, according to the Government Accountability Office. . . .

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Keeping It Short and Sweet.

15 Saturday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Criminal Law, Legal Writing, Texas Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Keeping It Short and Sweet.

Tags

Carving Doctrine, Ex parte McWilliams, Good Legal Writing, Presiding Judge Onion, Texas Supreme Court, Tiffany Johnson

Less is More, by Tiffany Johnson, Good Legal Writing

http://goodlegalwriting.com/2014/01/03/less-is-more/

I happened upon this interesting dissent in my research recently.  If you can forgive the biting tone (note the judge’s befitting name), I think the minimalist technique is pretty effective.  It’s not bogged down with preachy legalese.  It doesn’t pontificate or soliloquize. It’s short and (not so) sweet. . . .

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Did 9th Circuit Kill Gun Control In Response to 7th Circuit Case?

14 Friday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Constitution, Second Amendment, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Did 9th Circuit Kill Gun Control In Response to 7th Circuit Case?

Did The 9th Circuit Court Just Kill Gun Control?, by Michael McGough, Los Angeles Times – Opinion

http://tinyurl.com/n3t49v9

Last year, after the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Illinois’ blanket ban on the carrying of “ready to use” guns outside the home, a Los Angeles Times editorial said this:

‘Even if it were affirmed by the Supreme Court, the 7th Circuit’s decision probably wouldn’t threaten most state laws that impose sensible restrictions on the carrying of firearms. (In California, applicants for a ‘carry a concealed weapon’ permit must prove that they are of ‘good moral character,’ have sufficient cause to carry a weapon and have received firearms training.)’

We were wrong — sort of.

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

A New Theory of Hearsay – Part 2.

11 Tuesday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, Admissibility, Criminal Law, Evidence, Federal Rules of Evidence, Hearsay, Trial Tips and Techniques, Witnesses

≈ Comments Off on A New Theory of Hearsay – Part 2.

Tags

Colin Miller, Criminal Defendants, Evidence, Evidence ProfBlogger, EvidenceProf Blog, Federal Rule of Evidence, Hearsay, Hearsay Exception, Impeach, Nonhearsay Purpose, Rule 609

A New Theory of Hearsay, Take 2: Rule 609(a)(1)(B) & Statements Offered For a Nonhearsay Purpose, by Evidence ProfBlogger (Colin Miller, Editor), EvidenceProf Blog

http://tinyurl.com/m8pcyw8

Dan is on trial for aggravated battery. He has a prior conviction for aggravated battery. After Dan testifies, the prosecution seeks to impeach him through evidence of his five year-old conviction for armed robbery. To be admissible, the evidence cannot simply satisfy Federal Rule of Evidence 403; instead, pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 609(a)(1)(B), the prosecution must affirmatively prove that the probative value of the conviction outweighs its prejudicial effect.

A defendant calls an alibi witness at trial. After the alibi witness testifies on direct examination, the prosecution seeks to impeach him with evidence of a prior inconsistent statement that tends to incriminate the defendant. The prior statement is hearsay and only admissible to impeach that alibi witness, not to prove the truth of the matter asserted. My question today is: Should courts apply the same modified Rule 403 analysis that they would apply in the case above?

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

U.S. Supreme Court’s “Instruction Manual” on Class Action Litigation.

11 Tuesday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Arbitration, Class Actions, Class Certification, Consumer Contracts, Contract Law, Credit Repair, Employment Law, Litigation, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on U.S. Supreme Court’s “Instruction Manual” on Class Action Litigation.

Tags

American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant, Arbitration, AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, Class Action, Class Action Waiver Clauses, Class Certification, Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, Consumer Contracts, Credit Repair Organizations, Daniel P. Shapiro, Federal Arbitration Act, Inc. v. Dukes, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Litigation, Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter, Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. Animalfeeds International Corp., U.S. Supreme Court, Wal-Mart Stores

Recent Developments For Litigation Risk Mitigation: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Prescription, by Daniel P. Shapiro, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP  

(This piece is adapted from Daniel P. Shapiro’s article published in the November 2013, issue of AHLA Connections. © 2013 American Health Lawyers Association.)

Read Mr. Shapiro’s analysis of recent U.S. Supreme Court cases that have created an instruction manual of sorts for reducing litigation risks for American businesses, as stated below in the excerpt to his post.

There is a hyperlink at the end of the article that will take you to the original article. -CCE

 http://tinyurl.com/ldd7s2o

Over the past three years, since mid-2010, the Supreme Court has handed down a series of related decisions that, taken together, constitute an instruction manual for American business on how to reduce litigation risk. As the world has ‘flattened’ and trade has increasingly globalized and become borderless, it has been impossible to ignore that only in the U.S. economy is litigation such a prominent line item for business. This is particularly true with regard to class action litigation. No other country has the sort of class—or collective—action rules that the United States does. Perhaps in response to these facts, the Supreme Court has made it clear that through a combination of arbitration (as opposed to litigation) and class action waiver clauses properly used, businesses can contract out from under a great deal of litigation risk for the future and fundamentally change their litigation environment.

The new Supreme Court decisions offer instruction on how, exactly, to use arbitration clauses and class action waivers to mitigate litigation risk.

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Indiana Takes On Liquidated Damages in Contract Law.

11 Tuesday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Contract Law, Damages, Indiana Court of Appeals, Litigation, State Appellate Courts

≈ Comments Off on Indiana Takes On Liquidated Damages in Contract Law.

Tags

Auburn, Contract Law, ContractsProf Blog, Dean V. Kruse Foundation, Dean V. Kruse Foundation v. Gates, Indiana, Indiana Law Review, Jeremy Telman, Jerry Gates, Kimberly Cohen, Liquidated Damages, Michael Dorelli, Penalty Clause, Purchase Agreement, World War II Museum

Indiana Court of Appeals on Liquidated Damages, by Jeremy Telman, ContractsProf Blog

http://tinyurl.com/lqqbvpw

As you can see from the quote below, this is the fifth in this series. I encourage you to read the entire series to get the full big picture. -CCE

This is the fifth in a series of posts that draw on Michael Dorelli and Kimberly Cohen’s recent article in the Indiana Law Review on developments in contracts law in Indiana.

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Oh Happy Day for Pennsylvania Personal Injury Plaintiffs.

10 Monday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Case of First Impression, Damages, Evidence, Jury Persuasion, Litigation, Pennsylvania Superior Court, Personal Injury, State Appellate Courts, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Oh Happy Day for Pennsylvania Personal Injury Plaintiffs.

Tags

Appellate Law, Bodily Injury, Brian Butler, Damages, Daniel E. Cummins, Delay Damages Calculation, Future Medical Expenses, Pain and Suffering, Pennsylvania Superior Court, Personal Injury, Roth v. Ross and Erie Insurance Group, TORT TALK

Appellate Case of First Impression – Future Medical Expenses Are To Be Included in Delay Damages Calculation, by Daniel E. Cummins, TORT TALK

http://www.torttalk.com/2014/02/appellate-case-of-first-impression.html

In a case of first impression, the Pennsylvania Superior Court recently ruled in Roth v. Ross and Erie Insurance Group, 977 MDA 2013, 2014 Pa. Super. 20 (Pa. Super. Feb. 7, 2014 Donohue, Ott, J.J., Platt, S.J.)(Opinion by Donohue, J.), that an award of future medical expenses in a personal injury case should be included in the calculation of delay damages due to the Plaintiff on a verdict. . . .

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Legal Ethics Head’s Up – Don’t Get Drunk, Move A Dead Body, And Lie To Police.

10 Monday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Attorney Discipline, Kansas Supreme Court, Legal Ethics

≈ Comments Off on Legal Ethics Head’s Up – Don’t Get Drunk, Move A Dead Body, And Lie To Police.

Tags

Attorney Discipline, Kansas Supreme Court, Legal Ethics, Legal Profession Blog, Legal Profession Prof, Mike Frisch, Robert A. Mintz

Someone Died, Someone Lied, by Legal Profession Prof (Mike Frisch), Legal Profession Blog

http://tinyurl.com/p3vxrmw

A partner-shareholder has an adulterous affair with one of the firm’s associates who suffered from depression and alcohol abuse. From there, it sadly got worse. -CCE

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

The Legal Writing Debate on Footnotes Continues.

08 Saturday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, Appellate Law, Brief Writing, Citations, Court Rules, Footnotes, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on The Legal Writing Debate on Footnotes Continues.

Tags

ABA Journal, Brief Writing, Bryan Garner, Citations, Footnotes, Jason Steed, Ledet v. Seasafe, Legal Writing, Louisiana Appellate Court, New York Times, Raymond Ward, Rich Phillips, the (new) legal writer

The Never Ending Debate Over Citational Footnotes, by Raymond Ward, the (new) legal writer

http://tinyurl.com/lh3t2co

Mr. Ward gives us a brief overview in these two paragraphs. In the remainder of his post, Mr. Ward expands on his variations for citations in footnotes and the preferences of Fifth Circuit judges  I mean no disrespect to Mr. Garner, but if Mr. Ward gives advice on legal writing, I pay attention. -CCE

Who would have thought that, for over 13 years now, the most controversial subject among litigation-oriented legal writers would be the location of legal citations in footnotes versus in text? Back in the spring of 2001, a judge in an intermediate Louisiana appellate court, in writing the majority’s opinion in a case, put her legal citations in footnotes. This drew a concurring opinion from the chief judge (withdrawn before final publication), agreeing with the result but objecting to the use of footnotes for citations. So the author wrote her own concurring opinion defending her use of footnotes. The case is Ledet v. Seasafe, Inc., 783 So. 2d 611 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2001). The controversy stirred up by Ledet caught the attention of the New York Times. Here is my own little casenote on Ledet.

Fast-forward 13 years. Bryan Garner writes an article for the ABA Journal recommending the use of footnotes for legal citations—a position he’s held since I took my first Garner seminar in 1998. His fellow Texans Rich Phillips and Jason Steed write blog posts begging to differ. Different decade, pretty much the same debate.

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

JD Supra Changes Its Name and Scope.

02 Sunday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on JD Supra Changes Its Name and Scope.

Tags

J.D. Supra, J.D. Supra Business Advisor, Robert Ambrogi, Robert Ambrogi's Web Sites, U.S. Supreme Court

 New Tagline for JD Supra Underscores Business Focus, by Robert Ambrogi, Robert Ambrogi’s Law Sites

 http://tinyurl.com/kvpd6yc

Without any fanfare, JD Supra changed its tagline last month, to ‘JDSupra Business Advisor.’ The move emphasizes the company’s evolution from a simple aggregator of law-related content to a publisher, distributor and curator focused on delivering legal information to the business world.

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Can Law Enforcement Search A Cell Phone Without A Warrant?

02 Sunday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, Android Phones, California Supreme Court, Cell Phones, Constitution, Florida Supreme Court, Fourth Amendment - Search & Seizure, Georgia Supreme Court, iPad, iPhones, Legal Technology, Massachusetts Supreme Court, Ohio Supreme Court, Privacy, Tablets, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Can Law Enforcement Search A Cell Phone Without A Warrant?

Tags

California Supreme Court, Cell Phones, Fifth U.S. Court of Appeals, First U.S. Court of Appeals, Florida Supreme Court, Fourth Amendment, Fourth U.S. Court of Appeals, Georgia Supreme Court, Kwame Opam, Law Enforcement, Massachusetts Supreme Court, Ohio Supreme Court, Police, Probable Cause, Search and Seizure, Seventh U.S. Court of Appeals, The Verge, U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court Will Decide If Warrantless Cellphone Searches Are Constitutional, by Kwame Opam, The Verge

http://tinyurl.com/p7n2oqy

The United States Supreme Court will rule on two cases on whether a warrantless search of cell phones is legal under the Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions will impact Fourth Amendment search and seizure procedures for law enforcement – must police first obtain a search warrant to access the data on an arrestee’s cell phone? May a cell phone and its digital data be used as evidence?

At this time, both federal circuit courts and state supreme courts disagree as to whether the police can search a cell phone without a warrant. The Fourth, Fifth, and Seventh U.S. Court of Appeals, together with the Supreme Courts of Georgia, California, and Massachusetts say yes, they can. The First Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Courts of Florida and Ohio disagree.

The courts are not the only ones paying close attention to the outcome of these two cases. Several organizations and others are concerned about maintaining privacy of digital devices and data. Law enforcement is in favor a final decision allowing warrantless searches on cell phones if there is probable cause.

The Supreme Court may rule as early as April 2014. -CCE

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Free App to Access PACER on iPhones and iPads.

30 Thursday Jan 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Apps, Bankruptcy Law, Cell Phones, Dockets, E-Filing, Federal District Court Rules, Federal Law, iPad, iPhones, Legal Technology, PACER, Trial Tips and Techniques, U.S. Courts of Appeal

≈ Comments Off on Free App to Access PACER on iPhones and iPads.

Tags

Bankruptcy Court, Docket, Federal Court, iPads, iPhone J.D. Blog, iPhones, Jeff Richardson, Matthew Zorn, PACER

Review: DkT — access PACER on the iPad and iPhone, by Jeff Richardson, iPhone J.D. Blog

http://www.iphonejd.com/iphone_jd/2014/01/review-dkt-pacer.html

Jeff reviews a free app created by Matthew Zorn called “DkT.” In this post, Jeff leads you through the various steps to use this app. Because this is the first version, no doubt Matthew will tweak it as time goes by. Regardless of its minor flaws, if you practice in federal court, this is an incredibly useful tool for your iPad or iPhone. -CCE

If you ever practice in federal court, then using PACER is a part of your job.  PACER websites typically let you select a mobile option so that you can access PACER on an iPad or an iPhone, but the experience isn’t ideal.  You cannot save your username or password, it is difficult to manually enter case numbers, and every time you access a docket sheet or a document you have to pay to do so.  Matthew Zorn, an attorney at a large New York law firm, decided to do something about that, so he spent nine months writing a useful and beautifully designed app that he calls DkT.  The DkT app is free and can access PACER for federal appellate, district and bankruptcy courts.

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Do You Know Whether Your Judge Uses an iPad or Tablet? Find Out Before You Submit Your Next Brief.

28 Tuesday Jan 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, Apple, Brief Writing, Footnotes, iPad, Judges, Legal Technology, Legal Writing, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Do You Know Whether Your Judge Uses an iPad or Tablet? Find Out Before You Submit Your Next Brief.

Tags

Columbia Business Law Review, Daniel Sockwell, Eugene Volokh, iPad, Matthew Butterick, Typography for Lawyers

Writing a Brief for the iPad Judge, by Daniel Sockwell, Columbia Business Law Review

http://cblr.columbia.edu/archives/12940

‘Know your audience’ is a fundamental rule of skillful writing. For lawyers writing briefs in the 21st century, a key part of knowing your judicial audience is knowing what device will display your brief. While some judges print briefs and read the hard copy, a quiet revolution is occurring: more and more judges are reading briefs primarily on iPads or other tablets. According to experts on legal writing, this change in reading should trigger a similarly significant change in writing.

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Recent Rule Amendments by Arizona Supreme Court.

27 Monday Jan 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Advertising, Arizona Supreme Court, Continuing Legal Education, Criminal Law, Legal Ethics

≈ Comments Off on Recent Rule Amendments by Arizona Supreme Court.

Tags

Advertising, Arizona Attorney Magazine, Limited Scope Representation, MCLE, Patricia Sallen, Post-Conviction Disclosure, State Bar of Arizona, Supreme Court of Arizona

Other Arizona Rule Amendments, by Patricia Sallen, Arizona Attorney Magazine|State Bar of Arizona

http://tinyurl.com/o9vq6rh

In addition to adding the new mechanism to ER 1.15, the Supreme Court also recently made other significant ethics and practice-related rule amendments.

 

 

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...
← Older posts
Newer posts →
Follow The Researching Paralegal on WordPress.com

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Search

Sign In/Register

  • Create account
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com

Categories

Archives

  • June 2024
  • March 2022
  • January 2022
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • October 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • May 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013

Recent Comments

lawyersonia's avatarlawyersonia on In Custodia Legis – Lega…
Eric Voigt's avatarEric Voigt on Top 20 Paralegal Blogs, Websit…
profvoigt's avatarprofvoigt on Research Guides in Focus – Mun…
Make Your PDF Docume… on Make Your PDF Document Edit-Pr…
madlaw291282999's avatarmadlaw291282999 on Using Hyperbole -Are You Riski…

Recent Comments

lawyersonia's avatarlawyersonia on In Custodia Legis – Lega…
Eric Voigt's avatarEric Voigt on Top 20 Paralegal Blogs, Websit…
profvoigt's avatarprofvoigt on Research Guides in Focus – Mun…
Make Your PDF Docume… on Make Your PDF Document Edit-Pr…
madlaw291282999's avatarmadlaw291282999 on Using Hyperbole -Are You Riski…
  • RSS - Posts
  • RSS - Comments

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • The Researching Paralegal
    • Join 460 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • The Researching Paralegal
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.

    %d