Posted: March 2, 2004
Rules of Appellate Procedure
URAP 1. Scope of rules. Recognizes the new rules governing appeals in child welfare cases. Effective May 3, 2004.
URAP 2. Suspension of rules. Adds a reference to two of the new child welfare rules. Effective May 3, 2004.
URAP 11. The record on appeal. Requires the trial court to include any presentence investigation report as a part of the record on appeal, and clarifies the manner in which the record should be paginated.
URAP 12. Transmission of the record. Requires a certified court reporter to prepare and file a transcript index.
URAP 24. Briefs. Requires parties who are seeking attorney fees to explicitly state the basis for the request.
URAP 52. Child Welfare Appeals. A notice of appeal must be filed within 15 days from the order to be appealed. Cross-appeals must be filed within 15 days. Effective May 3, 2004.
URAP 53. Notice of Appeal. Describes the contents and service requirements of the notice of appeal. Effective May 3, 2004.
URAP 54. Transcript of Proceedings. Any necessary transcripts must be requested within 4 days after an appeal is filed. Effective May 3, 2004.
URAP 55. Petition on Appeal. The appellant must file a petition on appeal within 15 days from the notice of appeal. The rule describes the format and contents of the petition. Effective May 3, 2004.
URAP 56. Response to Petition on Appeal. A response to the petition on appeal must be filed with 15 days. Effective May 3, 2004.
URAP 57. Record on Appeal; transmission of record. Establishes what is considered to be the record on appeal and when it must be transmitted. Effective May 3, 2004.
URAP 58. Ruling. The court will issue a ruling based on the record on appeal, the petition, and the response, or the court can order that the case be fully briefed. Effective May 3, 2004.
URAP 59. Extensions of time. The rule describes the procedure and circumstances for extensions of time to file the appeal, the petition, or the response. Effective May 3, 2004.
There is a significant problem with regard to the manner in which cases are transferred from the Supreme Court to the Court of Appeals. This problem has not been addressed in the current amendments, and it should be addressed.
Formerly, cases were not reassigned to the Court of Appeals until after the parties’ docketing statements were filed. This gave the parties an opportunity, pursuant to Rule 9(c)(9), to make recommendations to the Court concerning whether such a transfer was appropriate. Recently, however, the Supreme Court began a new practice of making its determination re transfer without waiting for the docketing statements to be filed. This means, in effect, that parties no longer have any input into the decision at all, because under Rule 42(f), transfers to the Court of Appeals are FINAL except for questions of jurisdiction, which can never arise in the case of a transfer because the court of appeals has jurisdiction over “all” cases which are transferred by the Supreme Court. Either (1) the Supreme Court should revert to its former policy of not tranferring cases until the docketing statements have been filed; or (2) Rule 42(f) should be modified to give the parties the right to object to the transfer for “good cause,” which ought to be seen as any of the reasons set forth in Rule 9 militating against transfer.
There is a significant problem with regard to the manner in which cases are transferred from the Supreme Court to the Court of Appeals. This problem has not been addressed in the current amendments, and it should be addressed.
Formerly, cases were not reassigned to the Court of Appeals until after the parties’ docketing statements were filed. This gave the parties an opportunity, pursuant to Rule 9(c)(9), to make recommendations to the Court concerning whether such a transfer was appropriate. Recently, however, the Supreme Court began a new practice of making its determination re transfer without waiting for the docketing statements to be filed. This means, in effect, that parties no longer have any input into the decision at all, because under Rule 42(f), transfers to the Court of Appeals are FINAL except for questions of jurisdiction, which can never arise in the case of a transfer because the court of appeals has jurisdiction over “all” cases which are transferred by the Supreme Court. Either (1) the Supreme Court should revert to its former policy of not tranferring cases until the docketing statements have been filed; or (2) Rule 42(f) should be modified to give the parties the right to object to the transfer for “good cause,” which ought to be seen as any of the reasons set forth in Rule 9 militating against transfer.