Is Memorial Day, May 27, a Court Holiday? (2019 edition)

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

Memorial Day–May 27, 2019–is a day that we remember and honor those that have made the ultimate sacrifice for our freedom.  You probably already suspect that it is a court holiday, too

Navy Sailors and women in dress and large hats pose with flowers on a ship.

Memorial Day in 1918, just over a century ago.

But if you’re anything like us, you want–nigh, you NEED–to see it in writing from an authoritative source and you’ll probably be checking court websites at 11 p.m. on Sunday night to be sure.  Let us help.

The short answer is YES in Florida state courts.  Here’s the authority.

In Florida state courts, Memorial Day is one of the enumerated “Legal Holidays” in Florida Rule of Judicial Procedure 2.514(a)(6)(A) (.pdf) (defining “Legal Holiday”).

Additionally, every court lists Memorial Day on their own calendars:

Florida Appellate Courts

Florida Circuit Courts

Are you in federal court? You get the day off, too.

Was this post helpful? Subscribe for more!

This post is a continuation of our “Is it a holiday” series:

https://floridaappellate.com/2019/04/18/is-good-friday-a-court-holiday-2019-edition/

https://floridaappellate.com/2014/04/18/is-good-friday-a-holiday-it-depends/

https://floridaappellate.com/2015/01/19/is-martin-luther-king-day-a-holiday-in-florida-courts/

If you want to get updates on court holidays and other appellate happenings, subscribe to this blog under the “FLORIDA APPELLATE PROCEDURE UPDATES BY EMAIL” on this page.

 

What’s it like to appear before the United States Supreme Court? Let’s talk about it, podcast-style.

/1 Comment/in , , , , , , , /by

The United States Supreme Court hears oral argument from attorneys in only about 80 cases a year. Thus, many appellate attorneys never have the opportunity to experience what it is like to actually advocate in the High Court. I (Jared) recently learned what it is like appearing before the Supreme Court from Duane Daiker, a fellow board-certified appellate specialist in Tampa Bay and a good friend of DPW Legal, on the Issues on Appeal podcast.

Duane Daiker and Jared Krukar sit with studio monitors and microphones at a table while recording a podcast
Duane Daiker and Jared Krukar recording
the Issues on Appeal podcast.
Not pictured? The feather quill pen
memento Duane keeps in his office.
(Photo courtesy of Duane Daiker and used with permission.)

Duane is the creator and host of Issues on Appeal. Each week he speaks with fellow appellate practitioners about topics that are interesting to, well, the same people we suspect are interested in this Florida Appellate Procedure Weblog!

Duane recently took his first trip as an advocate to the Supreme Court. He sat second-chair on a case he handled through the trial and intermediate appellate stages. This visit was a perfect topic for his podcast. But rather than just talk about his visit himself on his podcast, Duane enlisted me to guest host his show, and turn the tables on him.

I asked every question I could come up with that all of us inquiring appellate nerds would want to ask. Where do you go when you enter the court? What’s security like? Who comes and talks to you? Is there a lawyers’ lounge? What’s it like sitting at counsel’s table? Did Justice Thomas ask a question? I hear you get a feather quill–can I touch it? (Yes, I really did ask, and yes, I did get to hold it. You know you would ask, too.) Our discussion was full of interesting tidbits about the preparation, the day of argument, the people at the Court, and the entire experience.

If this sounds interesting to you, check out Episode 4 of the Issues on Appeal podcast, “At the High Court.” You can check it out at the link or on iTunes, Google Podcasts, or Spotify.

And if you like that episode, listen to some of the other episodes. Duane has already had a number of great guests. Dineen and I are both slated to be guests for future episodes. What will we talk about? Stay tuned to find out.

Want to hear more about the United States Supreme Court or other appellate issues? Subscribe!

We’ve discussed the SCOTUS in the past (for example, here and here) and we’re sure to do it again. Keep abreast of changes there or in other courts that are interesting or may impact your practice by subscribing for updates on the Florida Appellate Procedure Weblog.

Old cartoon of man with bike quarreling with another man over a stone in the roadway.

Now You Can Appeal Two More Types of Nonfinal Orders

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

 

Old cartoon of man with bike quarreling with another man over a stone in the roadway.

Are these two gentlemen arguing over
whether they have a settlement?
Now they can let the appellate courts figure it out.

Today is the day that a myriad of changes to the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure go into effect. We’ve previously outlined all of the changes, but in our first post of 2019 we’ll focus in on the changes to Rule 9.130, which governs what kind of nonfinal orders you can immediately appeal to Florida District Courts.

Orders that decline to enforce a settlement agreement.

Rule 9.130 contains the exclusive list of non-final orders that are reviewable by appeal in the district courts.  As of January 1, parties will be able to obtain an immediate appeal from an order that determines “that, as a matter of law, a settlement agreement is unenforceable, is set aside, or never existed.”

This change appears to have been inspired by a law review article I co-authored with Anthony Russo and Ezequiel Lugo in 2013.  In the midst of investigating a proposed “functional restatement” to certiorari review, we looked into review of orders denying a motion to enforce settlement (see pages 417-424 of the linked article).  No avenue for review existed at the time, but as we discussed the matter we reasoned that immediate review of such an order would further the interests in judicial economy and support the long-established public policy favoring settlements.  The Appellate Court Rules Committee considered our article and also thought that immediate review of such an order would be worthwhile.  They made the recommendation to the Florida Supreme Court, and in this recent wave of amendments, the supreme court adopted this provision into the rules.

This rule will be useful when one party thinks that a settlement has been reached, but the other party either denies the same or refuses to comply with the settlement.  The party seeking to enforce the settlement may file a “motion to enforce settlement” in the trial court, attempting to either confirm the settlement or force the other party to comply.  Should the trial court deny the motion for whatever reason, that order would now be immediately appealable.

Orders that grant or deny a motion to disqualify counsel.

Similarly, parties may now also receive immediate review of orders that “grant or deny a motion to disqualify counsel.”  This type of motion has always been reviewable by certiorari, but given that higher standard of review, was not likely to provide any immediate relief.  Now, parties may seek immediate review regarding disqualification, and avoid the likelihood that the trial would have to proceed all the way through conclusion and then ultimately be invalidated on appeal just to send the parties back to the beginning.

Another consideration–a stay.

An appeal of either of these orders will not automatically delay the trial court proceedings while the appellate court considers the appeal.  Consequently, either party may want to move the trial court to stay the proceedings pending the appellate court’s ruling on the matter.  Doing so would avoid the risk of wasted effort and resources should the appellate court ultimately determine that there was an enforceable settlement agreement, or that the trial court erred in either disqualifying or refusing to disqualify counsel.

Motions for stay are governed by rule 9.310 and initially filed in the trial court in most cases.  Review of an order granting or denying a stay is by motion in the appellate court.  Both involve an in-depth analysis of the likelihood of prevailing on appeal and the risk of irreparable harm should a stay not be granted.

Can you use these new rules to your advantage?  Call us!

Non-final review jurisdictional issues and stays pending appeal are sometimes simple, but in our experience will often become complex issues that can determine the course of all future litigation.  We often handle these situations on behalf of clients or in cooperation with trial attorneys as part of our regular practice.  Feel free to contact us if you have any questions involving these or any other issues regarding non-final appeals, certiorari review, or stays pending appeal.