Litigation Commons^™

Some Thoughts On Reply Briefs, Brian Wolfman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This essay provides suggestions for writing reply briefs. It begins with a quick review of the well-understood ways in which an appellate advocate should acquire and review the information needed to write a comprehensive and powerful reply brief.

The essay then turns to the more difficult challenges of crafting the brief, making three key points:

First, don't just go tit-for-tat in responding to one point after another advanced by the appellee. That can be boring and ponderous and often requires you to argue the case on your opponent's terms. Rather, re-frame the case on your client's terms, taking the case …

How To Conclude A Brief, Brian Wolfman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This essay discusses the "conclusion" section of an appellate brief and its relationship to problems of argument ordering in multi-issue appeals. The essay first reviews the relevant federal appellate rules--Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28(a)(9) and Supreme Court Rule 24.1(j)--and explains the author's preference for short, precise, remedy-oriented conclusions, shorn of repetitive argument. It illustrates these points with examples from recently filed appellate briefs. The essay then turns to problems of argument ordering in multi-issue appellate briefs, with an emphasis on ending with a bang not a whimper, while sticking with the short, non-argumentative conclusion. The argument-ordering discussion is also …

Some Thoughts On Supplemental Authorities Under Federal Rule Of Appellate Procedure 28(J) And Related Musings, Brian Wolfman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This essay--prompted by my work directing Georgetown Law's Appellate Courts Immersion Clinic--discusses letters filed under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28(j). A "Rule 28(j) letter" is the federal appellate rules' principal mechanism for bringing supplemental authorities to an appellate court’s attention after the briefs have been filed. This essay covers (1) the Rule's basic attributes; (2) whether a 28(j) letter may be adversarial; (3) the types of authorities that may be--and should be--cited in a 28(j) letter; (4) proper timing for the filing of a 28(j) letter; (5) when and how to respond to a 28(j) letter; and (6) what …

Rwu Law News: The Newsletter Of Roger Williams University School Of Law 04-2021, Michael M. Bowden, Barry Bridges, Political Roundtable

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Asarco Llc V. Atlantic Richfield Company, Ryan L. Hickey

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabiltiy Act, commonly known as CERCLA, facilitates cleanup of hazardous waste sites and those contaminated by other harmful substances by empowering the Environmental Protection Agency to identify responsible parties and require them to undertake or fund remediation. Because pollution sometimes occurrs over long periods of time by multiple parties, CERCLA also enables polluters to seek financial contribution from other contaminators of a particular site. The Ninth Circuit clarified the particuar circumstances under which contribution actions may arise in Asarco LLC v. Atlantic Richfield Co., holding non-CERCLA settlements may give rise to CERCLA contribution …

It’S All Your Fault!: Examining The Defendant’S Use Of Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel As A Means Of Getting A “Second Bite At The Apple.”, Prentice L. White

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The United States Constitution provides individuals convicted of a crime with “a second bite at the apple.” The Sixth Amendment provides an avenue to appeal one’s conviction based on the claim of “ineffective assistance of counsel.” What were the Framers’ true intentions in using the phrase “effective assistance of counsel”? How does the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) of 1996 affect habeas corpus appeals? This article answers these questions through the eyes of Thomas—a fictional character who is appealing his murder conviction.

This article first looks at the history surrounding effective assistance of counsel and discusses the difficulties …

Appellate Remedy: The Ancient Precedents Of A Modern Right, Peter S. Poland

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Is Limited Remand Required If The District Court Admitted Or Excluded Evidence Without A Daubert Analysis?, Robert B. Gilbreath

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Double Jeopardy Violations As "Plain Error" Under Federal Rule Of Criminal Procedure 52(B), Gabriel J. Chin

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lessons From Usada V. Jenkins: You Can't Win When You Beat A Monopoly , Michael S. Straubel

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

According to the reporters who wanted to speak with LaTasha Jenkins, she was the first athlete in the seven-year history of the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) to win and clear herself of doping charges. USADA's record was now thirty-seven and one. Remarkably, the flawless record was beaten by a group of third year law students and their professor. But LaTasha did not want to speak with the reporters. To LaTasha, she had not won. She had been dragged through the mud, her career had been ended, and she was emotionally exhausted. Talking to reporters would only remind her of …

Suing Courts, Frederic Bloom, Christopher Serkin

Publications

This Article argues for a new and unexpected mechanism of judicial accountability: suing courts. Current models of court accountability focus almost entirely on correcting legal errors. A suit against the court would concentrate on something different--on providing transition relief, by way of legal remedy, to those bearing the heaviest burdens of desirable legal change. These suits may at first appear impossible. But suing courts is conceptually rational and mechanically reasonable, a tool that eases legal transitions while navigating the many hurdles modern doctrine puts in the way. This Article sets out the first complete account of how, where, and why …

Trial Procedure—An Analysis Of Arkansas's Exceptional Treatment Of The Contemporaneous Objection Rule In Criminal Bench Trials. Strickland V. State, 322 Ark. 312, 909 S.W.2d 318 (1995)., Dale D. Smith

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Privy Council And Private Law In The Tudor And Stuart Period: Ii, John P. Dawson

Michigan Law Review

In a previous instalment an attempt was made to describe the main subjects of private litigation dealt with by the English Privy Council under the Tudors and early Stuarts. It was suggested that the subjects were most heterogeneous and that the total volume of such litigation was large. In the present instalment will be discussed, first, the methods used to reduce the volume of private litigation by direct and indirect means; then the powers of coercion possessed by the Privy Council; and finally, its relations to the ordinary courts.