• Home
  • About Me
  • Disclaimer

The Researching Paralegal

~ Articles and Research for Legal Professionals

The Researching Paralegal

Category Archives: State Appellate Courts

Reminder – Minnesota Court Rules Are A-Changing.

23 Monday Jun 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Adoption Law, Appellate Judges, Appellate Law, E-Filing, Family Law, Juvenile Law, Legal Technology, Minnesota

≈ Comments Off on Reminder – Minnesota Court Rules Are A-Changing.

Tags

Adoption, Appellate Court Rules, Brief Writing, E-Filing, Juvenile Law, Minnesota, Minnesota Judicial Branch

In an earlier post, (https://researchingparalegal.com/2014/06/14/recent-court-rule-changes-for-minnesota-courts/) I mentioned that changes to appellate, juvenile, and adoption court rules in Minnesota’s would go soon go into effect on July 1, 2014. They are:

(Effective July 1, 2014) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Rules of Juvenile Protection Procedure and the Rules of Adoption Procedure.

(Effective July 1, 2014)  Court of Appeals Issues Standing Order Regarding Paper Copies of Briefs

(Effective July 1, 2014) Supreme Court Issues Standing Order Regarding Paper Copies of Briefs

(Effective July 1, 2014) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure

The orders for the appellate courts look especially important.  You can find hyperlinks to these orders here: http://tinyurl.com/nxawksy.   -CCE

 

 

Share this:

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

Recent Court Rule Changes For Minnesota Courts.

14 Saturday Jun 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Court Rules, Courts, Criminal Law, Justice Reform, Minnesota

≈ 1 Comment

Recent Rule Orders, Minnesota Judicial Branch

http://www.mncourts.gov/default.aspx?page=511#recentRules

The Minnesota Courts have been busy. Below you will see rule changes that are already in effect. Others will be in effect in the near future. For those practicing in the Minnesota appellate courts, state civil and criminal courts, and juvenile courts, this is a “must read.” -CCE

 

 06-12-2014 (Effective July 1, 2014) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Rules of Juvenile Protection Procedure and the Rules of Adoption Procedure.

03-10-2014 (Effective July 1, 2014)  Court of Appeals Issues Standing Order Regarding Paper Copies of Briefs

02-28-2014 (Effective July 1, 2014) Supreme Court Issues Standing Order Regarding Paper Copies of Briefs

02-28-2014 (Effective July 1, 2014) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure

12-31-2013 (Effective December 31, 2013) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct

12-06-2013 (Effective July 1, 2014) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Minnesota State Board of Continuing Legal Education

12-03-2013 Supreme Court Orders Amendments to General Rules Of Practice for the District Courts. Except with respect to Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 304.02 and 304.03, the amendedments are to be effective immediately. The amendments to Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 304.02 and 304.03 are to be effective on January 1, 2014.

09-18-2013 (Effective immediately) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Special Rules of Procedure Governing Proceedings Under the Minnesota Commitment and Treatment Act

08-06-2013 (Effective immediately) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Student Practice Rules

07-24-2013 (Effective immediately) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Rules Governing Civil Actions, Forms 145.1 and 145.2

06-13-2013 (Effective September 16, 2013) The Supreme Court Amends Order Promulgating Amendments to the Rules of Practice for the District Courts regarding mandatory eFiling and eService.  The effective date has been amended to September 16, 2013.

06/07/2013 (Effective September 1, 2013) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Rules of Practice for the District Courts regarding Mandatory E-Filing and E-Service

05/08/2013 (Effective July 1, 2013)  Supreme Court Adopts Amendments Authorizing Expedited Civil Litigation Track Pilot Project

03/15/2013 (Effective July 1, 2013) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments To The Rules Of Continuing Legal Education and Rules on Lawyer Registration Creating An Emeritus Lawyer Program

03/04/2013 (Effective May 1, 2013) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Student Practice Rules

02/12/2013 (Effective July 1,2013) Supreme Court Promulgates Corrective Amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure and General Rules of Practice Relating to the Civil Justice Reform Task Force.

02/04/2013 (Effective July 1, 2013) Supreme Court Adopts Amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure and General Rules of Practice Relating to the Civil Justice Reform Task Force.

01/17/2013 (Effective February 1, 2013) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Rules for Admission to the Bar Regarding Uniform Bar Examination and Rule 4B

01/17/2013 (Effective February 1, 2013) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Rules for Admission to the Bar Regarding House Counsel Pro Bono

01/17/2013 (Effective February 1, 2013) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Rules of Criminal Procedure Amending Rule 23.05

10/15/2012 (Effective December 1, 2012) Supreme Court Promulgates Amendments to the Rules of Juvenile Delinquency Procedure Authorizing ECourtMN Pilot Project

 

Share this:

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

No Insurance Coverage = No Bad Faith.

04 Wednesday Jun 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Faith, Insurance Coverage, Insurance Law, Pennsylvania Superior Court

≈ Comments Off on No Insurance Coverage = No Bad Faith.

Tags

Bad Faith, Declaratory Judgment, Fire Loss, Insurance Benefits, Insurance Coverage, Traveler's Insurance

Here’s a Thought: If There Ain’t No Coverage, There Ain’t No Bad Faith, by Daniel E. Cummins, TORT TALK

http://tinyurl.com/phwn6cv

In their recent ‘non-precedential’ decision (why do they mark them ‘on-precedential’ on occasion?!) in the bad faith case of Yera v. Travelers Ins. Co., of Am., 1398 EDA 2013 (Pa. Super. April 22, 2014)(Ford Elliott, P.J.E., Ott, J., Strassburger, J.) (Opinion by Ott, J.)(Concurring and Dissenting Op. by Strassburger, J.), the Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed a trial court’s finding that the homeowner’s insurance  carrier for the Plaintiff did not act in bad faith by waiting six (6) months to deny the Plaintiff’s fire loss claim as there could be no bad faith claim where there was an underlying decision that the carrier need not afford any coverage under the policy in any event. . . .

Share this:

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

Rhode Island Supreme Court Has No Problem With Impeachment.

11 Sunday May 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Assault, Criminal Law, Evidence, Impeachment, Rhode Island Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Rhode Island Supreme Court Has No Problem With Impeachment.

Tags

Assault, Character Evidence, Colin Miller, Conviction, Evidence, EvidenceProf Blog, Impeachment, Motion in Limine, Police, Resisting Arrest, Rhode Island Supreme Court

Impeachable?: Supreme Court of Rhode Island Finds No Problem With Impeachment Via Old, Similar Conviction, Editor:  Colin Miller, EvidenceProf Blog

http://bit.ly/1oEpyhi

[S]o, assume that a defendant is charged with resisting arrest, and the trial is held in 2012. Also, assume that the defendant has the following convictions: assault on a police officer (1987), a 1982 assault on a police officer (1982), and simple assault (1982). If the defendant files a motion in limine, seeking to preclude the prosecution from introducing evidence of these convictions into evidence, how should the court rule? . . . .

Share this:

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

South Carolina Supreme Court Gives Thumbs’ Up to LegalZoom.

27 Sunday Apr 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Legal Ethics, Legal Forms, Legal Technology, South Carolina Supreme Court

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Access to Justice, Greg Lambert, Legal Forms, Legal Zoom, Non-Lawyers, South Carolina Supreme Court, T. Travis Medlock v. LegalZoom, Three Geeks and a Legal Blog

LegalZoom Gets Nod From South Carolina Supreme Court, posted by Greg Lambert, Three Geeks and a Law Blog

http://www.geeklawblog.com/2014/04/legalzoom-gets-nod-from-south-carolina.html

The term ‘Access to Justice’ (A2J) is tossed around a lot in the legal world, but as the old saying goes, talk is cheap. It is common for state bar associations to step up and use another phrase to shoot down A2J projects or non-lawyers’ attempt to fill a gap in the legal process that is underserved. In most cases, it is seen as a ploy to protect the Bar Association’s members . . . at the expense of those needing help with a complicated legal system. One of the most contentious issues is on basic legal forms. Companies like LegalZoom have stepped in to create forms for the individual citizen, and have found many states are very reluctant in approving of their products and services. . . .

Share this:

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

Civil Appeals.

12 Saturday Apr 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Designations of the Record, Oklahoma Civil Appellate Procedure, Oklahoma Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Civil Appeals.

Tags

Civil Appeals, Lori Spencer, Oklahoma, P., The Haubrich Law Firm, The Record

Civil Appeals in Oklahoma, by Lori Spencer, The Haubrich Law Firm, P.C.

Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Appellate Judges Give Advice On Winning An Appeal.

06 Sunday Apr 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, Appellate Judges, Appellate Law, Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Citations, Judges, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Proofreading, Texas Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Appellate Judges Give Advice On Winning An Appeal.

Tags

Appellate Briefs, Appellate Judges, Appellate Law, Chad M. Ruback, Dallas Bar Association Judiciary Committee, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, Legal Analysis, Legal Writing, Texas, Texas Supreme Court

Appellate Judges Tell Dallas Lawyers How to Handle an Appeal, By Chad M. Ruback, Appellate Lawyer

http://tinyurl.com/ousooh9

The Dallas Bar Association Judiciary Committee recently hosted a panel discussion with three prominent appellate judges.  Catharina Haynes is the only federal appellate judge in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.  After years of sitting as a Dallas state trial court judge, she was appointed to sit on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.  Debra Lehrmann is the only Texas Supreme Court justice from Fort Worth.  Along with Chief Justice Nathan Hecht, she is one of only two Texas Supreme Court justices who began judicial service in North Texas.  After a distinguished career in a large Dallas law firm, Elizabeth Lang-Miers serves as a justice on the Fifth District Court of Appeals, which reviews the cases from Texas state trial courts in Dallas County and five other counties.

The three panelists offered a number of helpful tips for lawyers practicing before appellate courts. . . .

Share this:

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

Murder Charge Rejected in Mississippi Fetal Harm Case.

05 Saturday Apr 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Criminal Law, Drug Possession, Life Term, Manslaughter, Mississippi Supreme Court, Murder

≈ Comments Off on Murder Charge Rejected in Mississippi Fetal Harm Case.

Tags

Drug Use, Fetal Harm, Manslaughter, Mississippi, Murder Charge, National Advocates for Pregnant Women, Nina Martin, ProPublica, Stillborn Baby, Teen Pregnancy

Judge Throws Out Murder Charge in Mississippi Fetal Harm Case, by Nina Martin, ProPublica

http://tinyurl.com/k652sjc

The ruling means that the woman whose drug use had her facing a possible life term can at most be charged with manslaughter in the death of her stillborn daughter. . . . .

Share this:

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

Judges Prefer “Plain Language.” If This Is True, Then Why Don’t We Use It?

01 Tuesday Apr 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Judges, Citations, Federal Judges, Footnotes, Judges, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Legalese, Texas Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Judges Prefer “Plain Language.” If This Is True, Then Why Don’t We Use It?

Tags

Bryan Garner, Clarence Darrow, Joseph Kimble, Legal Writing, Michigan Bar Journal, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Plain English Submittee, Plain Language, Texas Plain Language Committee

 Judges on Effective Writing: The Importance of Plain Language, by Bryan Garner, Michigan Bar Journal Plain Language Committee

http://tinyurl.com/qf8fhsf

 (‘‘Plain Language’’ is a regular feature of the Michigan Bar Journal, edited by Joseph Kimble for the Plain English Subcommittee of the Publications and Website Advisory Committee. We seek to improve the clarity of legal writing and the public opinion of lawyers by eliminating legalese. Want to contribute a plain-English article? Contact Prof. Kimble at Thomas Cooley Law School, P.O. Box 13038, Lansing, MI 48901. For information about the Plain English Committee, see our website—http://www.michbar.org/generalinfo/plainenglish/home.cfm.)

Lawyers are notoriously poor at gauging what judges prefer in legal writing. Too many of us believe, for example, that judges expect us to use legalese. In 1991, when the Texas Plain-Language Committee surveyed all the state district and appellate judges in Texas, we found that more than 80 percent prefer plain language (Plaintiff complains of Defendant and says) over legalese (Now comes the Plaintiff, by and through his attorneys of record, Darrow and Holmes, and for his Original Petition in this cause would respectfully show unto the Court the following). Indeed, several judges responded to the survey with a plea that we stamp out legalese once and for all. . . .

Share this:

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

Jury Selection – How To Recognize A Bad Apple When You See One.

27 Thursday Mar 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Implied Bias, Indiana Supreme Court, Jury Selection, Peremptory Challenges, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Jury Selection – How To Recognize A Bad Apple When You See One.

Tags

Gender Discrimination, Implied Bias, Jury Selection, Peremptory Challenges, Race Discrimination, Richard A. Cook, The Barrister’s Toolbox, Trial Tips & Techniques

One Bad Apple Can Spoil the Whole Bunch. When Should a Juror, Not Be a Juror? by Richard A. Cook, The Barrister’s Toolbox – A Resource for Trial Advocacy

http://tinyurl.com/mv92klj

Jury selection is often where your case is won or lost. One bad juror can spoil your whole case. That one juror could lead the other jurors to render an adverse verdict, a compromise verdict or lead to gridlock and a hung jury. In civil cases, you often have limited peremptory challenges, where you can eliminate a juror without showing actual bias or other grounds for disqualification. So what exactly is the law? When is a judge obligated to grant your motion to strike a juror for cause? . . . .

Share this:

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

Oklahoma’s 2014 Official Citation Change – What Does it Mean?

02 Sunday Mar 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Citations, Legal Writing, Oklahoma Civil Appellate Procedure, Oklahoma Supreme Court, Public Domain Citations, Uniform Electronic Legal Material Act

≈ Comments Off on Oklahoma’s 2014 Official Citation Change – What Does it Mean?

Tags

Citing Legally Blog, National Reporter System, Neutral Citation, Oklahoma, Peter Martin, Public Domain Citation, Thomson Reuters, Uniform Electronic Legal Material Act

Oklahoma Makes It Official (But What Does That Signify?), by Peter Martin, Citing Legally Blog

http://citeblog.access-to-law.com/?p=107

For over 16 years Oklahoma appellate courts have attached non-proprietary, print-independent citation data to their decisions at the time of release, placed those decisions online at a public site, and required lawyers to cite state precedent using this contemporary system. Moreover, setting Oklahoma apart from other neutral citation pioneers, the judiciary staff applied neutral citations retrospectively to all prior decisions rendered during the print era, placed copies of them online as well, and encouraged but did not require that they also be cited by the new system.  Until this year, however, the print reports of the National Reporter System remained the “official” version of Oklahoma decisions.  As of January 1, 2014, sixty years after the Oklahoma Supreme Court designated the West Publishing Company as the ‘official publisher’ of its decisions, it revoked that designation. 

Share this:

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

Court Splits on Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress.

27 Monday Jan 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Damages, Health Law, Litigation, Massachusetts Supreme Court, Medical Malpractice, Torts, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Court Splits on Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress.

Tags

Bystander Liability, Damages, Emotional Distress, Impact Rule, Medical Malpractice, Neglience, Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Toney v. Chester County Hospital, Tort, Zone of Impact Liability

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Splits On Extension of Tort of Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress, by Daniel E. Cummins, TORT TALK Blog

http://tinyurl.com/mr4matq

The recent December 22, 2011 split decision by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in the long-anticipated Opinion in the case of Toney v. Chester County Hospital, 2011 WL 6413948 (Pa. Dec. 22, 2011)(Baer, Todd, and McCaffery, JJ. join in support of affirmance)(Castille, Saylor, Eakin, JJ. join in support of reversal)(Orie Melvin, J. not participating) serves to fuel an argument in favor of the extension of the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED).

Share this:

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

2014 Amendments to Oklahoma’s Workers’ Compensation Court Rules.

25 Saturday Jan 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Court Rules, Oklahoma Supreme Court, Workers' Compensation

≈ Comments Off on 2014 Amendments to Oklahoma’s Workers’ Compensation Court Rules.

Tags

2014 Amendments, Court Rules, Supreme Court of Oklahoma, Workers' Compensation Court

In Re Court Rules Of The Workers’ Compensation Court, 2014 OK 2, Decided January 16, 2014, Corrected January 17, 2014, published by the Supreme Court of the State of Oklahoma.

http://tinyurl.com/l7anrkw

Please note that the 2014 amendments to Oklahoma’s Workers’ Compensation Court Rules are not effective until January 31, 2014. –CCE

The Court Rules of the Workers’ Compensation Court as amended and approved by that Court on December 20, 2013, having been submitted to this Court for its consideration, are hereby approved. The rules are for official publication and shall become effective on January 31, 2014. The rules as amended shall be published in the Oklahoma Bar Journal three times. By today’s adoption of these rules, submitted by the Workers’ Compensation Court, this Court neither indicates what meaning should be ascribed to them in any given application nor settles their validity against challenges that may be launched on constitutional or statutory grounds, federal or state.

Share this:

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

PDF Hyperlinks & E-Briefs Requirement by Some Courts.

18 Saturday Jan 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Brief Writing, Citations, E-Briefs, E-Briefs, Legal Writing, PDF Hyperlinks, Quotations, Tennessee Supreme Court, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on PDF Hyperlinks & E-Briefs Requirement by Some Courts.

Tags

California, Connecticut, E-Briefs, Ernie Svenson, Federal Court, Hon. David Nuffer, Hyperlinking, Link Rot, New Hampshire, PDF for Lawyers, PDF Hyperlinks, Texas Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court

PDF Hyperlinks & E-Briefs: Overview Of How Lawyers Can Use And Create Them, By Ernie Svenson, PDF for Lawyers

http://pdfforlawyers.com/pdf-hyperlinks-ebriefs/

To emphasize the point, here is a brief compilation of Courts that use or require .pdf hyperlinks. Please note that this is not a complete list. If you know of other courts that require or allow .pdf hyperlinks in briefs, please forward that information to me, and I will post it. As a general caveat, always check your Court’s rules when preparing any brief to be filed with the Court, and follow them concisely.

Also, please note that the U.S. Supreme Court uses hyperlinks to citations in its opinions. But, it has encountered something called “link rot,” which causes hyperlinks to deteriorate with time. That issue has been discussed in here at:  https://researchingparalegal.com/2013/10/22/a-plan-to-stop-link-rot-forever-perma-cc/. You can easily subscribe to Perma.cc. The only problem I have encountered that it is still in beta stage and is not 100% reliable. If you encounter problems, the people who do the trouble-shooting respond quickly.-CCE

Electric Filing Order, Supreme Court of Texas: http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/ebriefs/ebriefs.asp

New Hampshire Judicial Branch: http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/ebriefs/ 

Electronic Briefs in Trial and Appellate Courts, Jurist: http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/courttech3.htm

California Courts – Electronic Filing/Submissions: http://www.courts.ca.gov/8872.htm

State of Connecticut Judicial Branch – E-Citation Procedures and Technical Standards: https://eservices.jud.ct.gov/Login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fdefault.aspx

 

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • 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