[an error occurred while processing this directive]

 

Dec. 11, 2017

Serving Petitions for Review on the Court of Appeal
The California Supreme Court has announced that "Notwithstanding the requirements set forth in California Rules of Court, Rule 8.500(f)(1), submission of a petition for review through TrueFiling that is accepted for filing by the Supreme Court constitutes service of the petition on the Court of Appeal." This means you do not have to separately serve the Court of Appeal through TrueFiling. For more information about electronic filing in the California Supreme Court and the First Appellate District, please visit the FDAP efiling page
Electronic Transcripts - Stage 1

Effective January 1, 2018, the default form of reporters transcripts will be electronic instead of paper. (New. Code Civ. Pro. sec. 271, adopted in AB 1450.)  Some panel attorneys will be pleased; some will be frustrated. In addition, the new law has an important cost-shifting impact we are working to address. Because many clients---particularly those who are incarcerated---cannot receive or use an electronic format, panel attorneys would have to print the transcript for the client at the end of the case. This shifts the printing costs from the superior court to the Court Appointed Counsel program. While we assume such costs would be reimbursable to the panel attorney, the program should not have to absorb these new costs. 

Fortunately, the new law allows a party to request a paper transcript in lieu of the electronic transcript. (Sec. 271(a)(1).) FDAP is working with the Court of Appeal to develop a local rule or standing order deeming indigent parties to have requested paper RTs, at least in the types of cases (adult criminal) in which the client is more likely to want and need the transcript when the appeal is over. We hope that the local rule or order will also permit waiver of its terms for panel attorneys who prefer to receive the electronic transcripts. (It is likely that the other Courts of Appeal will issue local rules or orders too.) 

Please remember that CCP section 271 only applies to RTs. Presumably, Clerks Transcripts will remain paper in all counties. 

We will keep you posted regarding the implications of this new law, including the adoption of any local rule/order, how electronic transcripts will be transmitted, and how and when to request reimbursement for any associated printing costs on compensation claims.

As always, we appreciate your patience as technological changes necessitate yet more law practice changes.
The Avoidable Supplemental Brief

Some supplemental briefs are unavoidable, such as when a post-AOB published decision or law bears on an argument already raised or opens the door to a new argument. Other times supplemental briefs are the result of counsel overlooking an issue. When this happens, there is an ethical obligation to remedy the oversight with a supplemental brief. But it is far preferable to catch the issue in time for the AOB because supplemental briefing is inefficient, disrupting the orderly litigation of the case. When counsel files a supplemental brief later in the proceedings----e.g. after respondent has filed the respondent's brief or after the Court of Appeal has begun to work up the case---it is more disruptive and increases the possibility the Court will not permit it.

The root causes of overlooked issues are usually time management (e.g. counsel was rushed to file the AOB) or not being current with the law (e.g. counsel was unaware of a new legal development). To avoid the inefficiencies of supplemental briefing, counsel has an obligation to manage the case in a timely manner, promptly reviewing and completing the record and timely researching and writing the brief. And counsel has an obligation to stay current with recent developments, be they caselaw, statutes, or new approaches developed and suggested by colleagues.

These points are thoroughly explored in an ADI news alert authored by ADI Executive Director Elaine Alexander. Review the ADI article and adopt the best practices described therein and you will minimize the need for supplemental briefs and hopefully eliminate the prospect of the Court refusing a supplemental brief, to the detriment of your client. 
Register for FDAP's 2018 Annual Training

FDAP's 2018 annual training seminar will be held on Friday, February 9, 2018, in San Francisco.  Registration is currently open only to panel attorneys; registration for others will open on Jan. 2. So reserve your spot now!

For details and to register, visit the FDAP website seminar page
If you are an Amazon shopper, please consider shopping through AmazonSmile and selecting FDAP for donations by AmazonAmazon will donate 0.5% of the price of your eligible AmazonSmile purchases to FDAP whenever you shop on AmazonSmile.

 

 

 

 

                                                                                     


 

back to news

 

HOME | ABOUT FDAP | NEWS | CLAIMS | CONTACT US | SITE MAP | DISCLAIMER
Copyright © 2017 First District Appellate Project. All rights reserved