Category Archives: Appellate Practice

Seventh Circuit’s Response to Judge Posner Misses the Point

The Seven Circuit, through Judge Wood, has responded to Judge Posner’s criticism of the Court’s approach to those without lawyers as follows: First, while [Judge Posner] is certainly entitled to his own views about such matters as our Staff Attorney’s … Continue reading

Advertisement

Posted in Access to Justice Generally, Appellate Practice, Defender Programs, Federal Courts, Judicial Ethics, Non-Lawyer Practice | 1 Comment

More on Judge Posner’s Apostasy

This from Adam Liptak in the Times on Judge Posner’s resignation speaks for itself (read the whole piece, please). “About six months ago,” Judge Posner said, “I awoke from a slumber of 35 years.” He had suddenly realized, he said, … Continue reading

Posted in Access to Counsel, Access to Justice Generally, Appellate Practice, Books, Federal Courts, Pro Bono | 1 Comment

Claudia Johnson Guest Post: Appellate Courts show willingness to reverse decisions where due process and decisions are not explained in SRL cases—Are DV cases the canary and a natural for innovation?

Multiple decisions have come to my attention where appellate courts are reversing trial courts on cases where one of the parties did not have a lawyer. All cases come from Domestic  Violence dockets. Is this a new trend for DV … Continue reading

Posted in Access to Justice Generally, Appellate Practice, Document Assembly, Domestic Violence, Family Law, Guest Bloggers, Judicial Ethics, Self-Help Services | 1 Comment

A Way For Courts to Show They Are Serious About Making The Law Accessible — Plain Language Explanations of Appellate Decisions

Here is an idea for how appellate courts could demonstrate their committement to making the law accessible.  They could include in all decisions a short explanation of the decision in plain language (great examples of plain language in box in … Continue reading

Posted in Appellate Practice, Plain Language | 1 Comment

What Do Courts Mean to Say When They Cite the Proposition That The Same Rules Apply to the Self-Represented and the Represented

All to often, appellate courts cite something for the proposition that self-represented litigants are held to the same rules as those with lawyers.  The problem with this obvious statement (which is even in its own terms untrue when the rules … Continue reading

Posted in Appellate Practice, Judicial Ethics, Supreme Court | 3 Comments