ILNews

Changing how state appeals are started

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

For the first time in Indiana’s history, lawyers and litigants will no longer be able to file appeals the way it has typically been done.

A new Indiana Supreme Court rule amendment that took effect Jan. 1, 2012, requires all appeal notices be filed with the Indiana Appellate Clerk’s Office in Indianapolis – instead of the local jurisdiction – within 30 days of a final judgment.

appeals Case manager Lue Hilliard processes appellate documents at the Indiana Appellate Clerk’s Office, stamping the papers to note they’ve been filed.. (IBJ Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

While some questions remain about how the new process will play out, the legal community does have a two-year grace period before parties lose the right to appeal by not filing the documentation in the correct place.

“From a foundational level, this is the biggest change we’ve ever seen on how the appeals process gets started,” said Indianapolis attorney Maggie Smith, immediate past chair of the Indiana State Bar Association’s Appellate Practice Section and member of the Indiana Supreme Court’s Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure. “We’re at a point we haven’t seen before, and there’s some open questions about how this will all work.”

The Indiana Supreme Court in September issued an order amending Indiana Appellate Procedure Rule 9 on the filing of a notice of appeal. Historically, attorneys would file a brief notice of appeal form in the local jurisdiction where a final judgment was issued and serve notice on the appellate clerk’s office to start the process.

In studying this rule change, Maggie Smith said some significant problems were discovered. Although the existing rules said a party was supposed to file in the trial court and serve a copy on the appellate court to allow for monitoring of that case to begin, it wasn’t working that way in practice. In about 30 percent of cases, the appellant wasn’t serving the Court of Appeals notice of the appeal, even though the other parties and trial court were already sending the case records to the appellate level.

It was also discovered that some trial courts in Indiana were denying a party’s notice of appeal or dismissing the appeal outright when they didn’t have that authority, Maggie Smith said. The ISBA Appellate Practice Section reported this was not an uncommon practice, she added.

“We (on the Rules Committee) receive complaints about how certain rules are applied, so we have to sit down and decide if this is an issue where a rule is insufficient or it’s just not being followed,” she said. “Most rank and file of the bar fall into the category of saying the rule is sufficient, but it’s just not being followed.”

In addition to changing where the notice is filed, the revised rule requires that the notice of appeal contain information such as the names of the parties and counsel; trial information; the date and title of the judgment or order appealed; the date on which any motion to correct error was denied or deemed denied; the basis for appellate jurisdiction; preparation of the clerk’s record; transcript preparation; whether all or any portion of the court records were sealed or excluded from public access by court order; and whether the appellant is willing to participate in alternative dispute resolution.

Unless the notice of appeal is timely filed, the right to appeal will be forfeited. A two–year grace period is in effect until Jan. 1, 2014, for an appellant that timely files the appeal notice with the trial court clerk or administrative agency instead of the state appellate clerk’s office as required.

Appellate Clerk Kevin Smith says these new notices of appeal won’t be subject to the notice of defect process, and they’ll be forwarded to the Court of Appeals without review by the clerk’s office. He said about 15 to 20 percent of defects in the past have dealt with appellant case summaries from attorneys and pro se litigants.

“Attorneys shouldn’t be thinking we’re going to be operating as gatekeepers to catch non-substantive defects, as we have before,” he said. “We think this will free up our case managers to file more paper because they won’t be reviewing mistakes.”

But questions remain about whether the grace period extends to the other rule revisions, such as the content of the notice. Some wonder if the appeal is forfeited if an attorney or party files in the correct place, but doesn’t include the correct materials.

Big firm attorneys say they’re changing the language and process used for how they file appeals to comply with the new party listings that now must be included. Smaller firms and solo practitioners who don’t file as many appeals say they’re more concerned about the amount of work that might go into preparing an appellate notice within those 30 days rather than the additional months they’d have to prepare them under the former rules.

“Most significant isn’t necessarily where one files, but the nature of the appeal,” said Bloomington appellate attorney Karen Wyle. “This new process has engulfed and replaced the appellate case summary and makes it much more complicated.”

Wyle said the process has traditionally been equivalent to telling the trial court clerk one’s appealing the case, so the county will need to start preparing the docket and record. She’s walked people through the process pro se before, but now Wyle worries this change could limit the number of self-represented litigants.

“This makes me nervous,” she said. “This means you have to know your way around to get the right documents and be able to know what they mean. It’s more work sooner, especially when someone calls me at the last-minute with only a couple days left before the deadline.”

To comply with a 30-day deadline, Wyle predicts some attorneys might have to take an appeal and then rework any retainer fee agreement so that they have the ability to later withdraw if they learn the case might not be a viable appeal.

Addressing some of the concerns, Maggie Smith said while the notice may look like it is more work up front, she said it is about 20 percent of what had been required before.

“That’s the tension between making rule changes. You can sit back here and theoretically say, if you’re an appellate attorney, you need to know the rules governing the practice, just like if you’re going into a local court before you go into the court.

“Attorneys don’t operate that way, and they go off past experiences. That’s likely no longer good (enough) for what the courts require. But if someone doesn’t open the rule book or hasn’t attended CLE in four years, those practitioners are going to find themselves in trouble on several fronts. More people will probably learn about this by doing it wrong, by getting a letter from the Court of Appeals. At least for the first two years, you won’t have the appeal dismissed,” she said.

The ISBA Appellate Practice Section plans to travel statewide during the next year offering free CLE to anyone who wants to know more about the rule change. Maggie Smith also said the ISBA plans to hold educational sessions for court reporters, court clerks and trial judges to learn more about the changes.•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • grace period
    Hi, Karen. The quote above was talking about where you file. You're 100% correct that, as written, the grace period does not apply to content defects. That remains to be an issue for the Court of Appeals.

    In the past, non-substantive defects in a Notice of Appeal were insufficient to dismiss an appeal. The big and unresolved question is whether the new content required in the Notice of Appeal will be considered non-substantive.

    I think it is reasonable to argue that what was required in the old Notice of Appeal is the substantive part, and the new content required as a result of the Case Summary being abolished is not substantive since it wasn't required before. But that's just my opinion . . .
  • [whoops - grammar correction]
    (That should have read: "... if the content ... fails to conform")
  • Will grace period apply to contents of Notice of Appeal?
    I hope Maggie Smith is correct that appeals will not be dismissed within the two-year grace period if the contents -- rather than the place of filing -- fails to conform to the new rules. The grace period applies explicitly to filing in the wrong place, and says nothing about filing the obsolete short form of Notice.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT
    Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
    1. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

    2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

    3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

    4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

    5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

    ADVERTISEMENT