Posts in category “Rules”

I’ve criticized the current regime of interlocutory qualified-immunity appeals quite a bit on this site. I recently wrote about how Mitchell v. Forsyth—which created qualified-immunity appeals—is a borderline coherent decision (if that). I’ve also recently touched on how the courts have steadily expanded the scope and availability of qualified-immunity appeals while undermining the supposed limits on those appeals.…

Updated with thoughts on some comments I’ve received.

In 2018, I published an article about cumulative finality. The cumulative-finality doctrine allows certain events to save certain premature notices of appeal. The rule can’t be stated much more specifically, however, because the law in this area is all over the map.…

Last summer, the Rules Committee proposed amending Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(c). The rule requires that appellants designate the judgment or order they are appealing in their notice of appeal. Several courts of appeals have read this requirement to mean that appellate jurisdiction exists over only the specified judgment or order.…

Updated August 22, 2019 with two additional thoughts.

The Rules Committee has published proposed amendments to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(c) for public comment. The amendments are good—they correct misreadings of Rule 3 that had senselessly deprived litigants of their appellate rights. But because the amendments correct a misreading of the rule as it’s currently written, they add complexity to Rule 3 that might prove confusing to those who were unaware of the problem.…