Search Results (4760)
Documents on Appellate Practice
Show: results per page
|Doing More with Less: Forthcoming Changes to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure|
David C. Dziengowski, Rachel A.H. Horton; Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP;
November 17, 2016, previously published on November 2016The Declaration of Independence contains 1,337 words. Including its 27 amendments, the U.S. Constitution contains 7,591 words. By contrast, today’s practitioners may include up to 14,000 words in a principal brief in the federal courts of appeals. That is about to change.
|NHTSA To Release Automated Driving Guidelines by End of Summer|
Sutherland Asbill Brennan LLP;
August 5, 2016, previously published on August 5, 2016The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”) recently announced that the organization will release guidelines for vehicles with automated driving technology by the end of the summer. The guidelines will address safety standards to aid manufacturers in the development and...
|State Appellate Court Considers if School Board Violated Open Meetings Act|
Melissa Schoenbein; Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen Professional Corporation;
July 26, 2016, previously published on Spring 2016The Fall 2015 edition of A Lesson Learned included a story about a school board accused of violating the Open Meetings Act when the Board voted to approve a superintendent's separation agreement.
|Third Circuit Affirms Dismissal Where Post-Trial Movant Refused to Recreate Missing Trial Record|
David C. Dziengowski, Bruce P. Merenstein; Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP;
July 26, 2016, previously published on June 2016You litigate a case in federal court and get an adverse verdict. Believing this result unjust, you file a post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law and in the alternative for a new trial. But there is a problem: two-thirds of the trial record is missing. What do you do?
|Appellate Court Finds Section 8.1b AMA Impairment Rating Report Not Mandatory|
Brad Elward; Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen Professional Corporation;
July 25, 2016, previously published on July 1, 2016On June 28, 2016, the Illinois Appellate Court, Workers' Compensation Commission Division, held that section 8.1b of the Illinois Workers' Compensation Act, commonly referred to as the AMA rating report provision, does not require a party to submit an AMA impairment report for the purpose of...
|After Prevailing in the Pa. Superior Court, Why Should I File a Cross-Appeal in the State Supreme Court?|
Duane Morris LLP;
July 22, 2016, previously published on June 17, 2016The Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s recent decision in Meyer, Darragh, Buckler, Bebenek & Eck, P.L.L.C. v. Law Firm of Malone Middleman, P.C. (No. 8 WAP 2015), highlights a quandary of Pennsylvania appellate procedure regarding cross-appeals and the need to consider when to file a protective...
|Patent Office’s Continuation Filing Deadline Rule Upheld by the Federal Circuit|
Ernest V. Linek; Banner & Witcoff, Ltd.;
July 21, 2016, previously published on June 22, 2016Yesterday, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded the decision of the Delaware district court in Immersion Corp. v. HTC Corp., No. 1:12-cv-00259, 2015 WL 627425 (D. Del. Feb. 11, 2015). That case held that to have continuity with an earlier filed application that was...
|Supreme Court Relies on Attorney Notes in Considering a Claim of Racial Profiling in Juror Selection|
Bradley W. (Brad) Harrison, José A. Isasi, C. Kevin Marshall, Charles R.A. Morse, Neil Vakharia; Jones Day;
July 20, 2016, previously published on May 2016On May 23, 2016, in Foster v. Chatman, No. 14-8349, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified how courts should address Batson claims of unlawful discrimination during juror selection and highlighted the role that notes in an attorney's files may play in these inquiries.
|D.C. Circuit Court Dismisses Appeal Challenging 2008 STEM OPT Rule|
Fragomen Del Rey Bernsen Loewy LLP;
July 14, 2016, previously published on May 13, 2016Three days after a replacement STEM Optional Practical Training (OPT) program went into effect, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed a federal lawsuit by a technology worker’s union that sought to contest the validity of the prior STEM OPT program. In its decision, which was issued...
|Non-Mutual Collateral Estoppel: A Shield, but Now Clearly Also a Sword|
J. Bradford McCullough; Lerch, Early & Brewer, Chartered;
June 19, 2016, previously published on May 27, 2016Last summer, I reviewed the decision of the Court of Appeals in Shader v. Hampton Improvement Ass’n, Inc., 443 Md. 148 (2015), and the decision of the Court of Special Appeals in Garrity v. Maryland State Bd. of Plumbing, 221 Md. App. 78 (2015), and posed the following question: In addition...