The crush of a burdensome caseload has made oral argument a scarce commodity in many federal appellate courts, writes Howard J. Bashman. In this commentary, the appellate litigator examines the systems used by the courts to decide whether an appeal should be argued. He concludes that at least two of the circuits use nonsensical methods that risk wasting court resources.
September 10, 2007 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
Related: Bashman Archive
The crush of an incredibly burdensome caseload has made oral argument a scarce commodity in many federal appellate courts. Throughout most of the country, long gone are the days where federal appellate courts will schedule each and every appeal in which both sides are represented by counsel for oral argument unless the attorneys convince the court that oral argument is unnecessary.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
