Supreme Court E-Filing to Begin Nov. 13, 2017

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

Last week we reported that the Supreme Court of the United States went live with their new website–its first step of a modernization plan that includes e-filing.  Yesterday, the Court set a date for e-filing to begin and provided some details.

According to the Court’s press release, e-filing will begin on November 13, 2017.  Parties will be required to file both paper and electronic copies, with the paper copy being the official copy for now (so remain vigilant with your mailing and paper filing practices!).  Pro se parties will continue to file just paper, but the Court will scan all filings to make them available on the electronic system.  That system should provide easy website access to all filed documents for public access.

Registration for the new e-filing system will begin “4-8 weeks before the system begins operation,” so keep a lookout for another press release at about mid-September.  The Court has placed an “Electronic Filing” link in the center of its home page that it says will supply additional information, but currently contains only the text of the press release.

A recent video from the U.S. Courts shows the amazing efficiencies obtained from e-filing in other federal courts.  Presumably the same benefits of modernization will occur in the Supreme Court.  That said, one wonders what the new, leaner Supreme Court will look or feel like.  We can’t help but feel a bit nostalgic for the days of paper as this bastion of traditional practice updates for the twenty-first century.

 

 

Eleventh Circuit Amended Rules Go Into Effect Today With Minor Changes

/0 Comments/in , , , /by
Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, Atlanta

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, Atlanta

Amendments go into effect today, August 1, 2017, for six of the Eleventh Circuit’s local rules.  The changes are minimal and, on the whole, positive for parties and practitioners alike.

  • 11th Cir. R. 22-3:  The use of the clerk’s form for filing “a second or successive habeas corpus petition or motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence” is no longer required, but merely encouraged in some cases.
  • 11th Cir. R. 31-1(d):  In addition to jurisdictional questions on main appeals, the rule now also contemplates potential jurisdictional questions on cross-appeals, expressly providing for postponement of the due date of the appellee-cross-appellant’s brief until the court determines that the appeal should proceed.
  • 11th Cir. R. 42-2(e):  A motion to set aside a dismissal of a civil appeal for failure to file a brief or appendix must now only be accompanied by the missing document, not both as previously required.
  • 11th Cir. R. 46-1:  Incorporates some of the content from FRAP 46, IOP 3 regarding attorney admission fees, and replaces specific payment information with references to 11th Cir. R. 46-3 and the court’s website.
  • 11th Cir. R. 46-2: deletes the specific dollar amount required for bar membership renewal, instead referencing the court’s website.
  • 11th Cir. R. 46-4: deletes payment information, instead referencing the court’s website.

You can view the full text of the updated rules here [.pdf].  Give us a call if you have a federal appeal coming up–we’re experienced in navigating the numerous technicalities of the federal appellate rules.

First District Court of Appeal Requests Comments on Stipulated Extensions

/0 Comments/in , , , , , /by

The First District Court of Appeal is considering joining the Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth districts in allowing parties to stipulate to enlargements of time in certain instances. From the First District:

The First District Court of Appeal, which is currently the only DCA that does not allow for stipulated enlargements.

Request for Comments On Consideration to Allow Stipulated Extensions of Time in Certain Cases

The First District Court of Appeal is considering adopting a court policy allowing attorneys to submit stipulated extensions of time for filing briefs in cases not requiring expedited review. To ensure full consideration of the impact of such a policy on the public and members of the Bar, the Chief Judge invites comments, which may be submitted electronically no later than August 31, 2017 to Jon S. Wheeler, Clerk of Court, at comments@1dca.org.

 

http://www.1dca.org/requestforcomments.html

Our vote is certainly yes! Let the judges focus on substantive motions rather than extension motions. No matter what your position, get your comments in before August 31st.