Rules of Appellate Procedure – Comment Period Closed February 2, 2026

URAP005. Discretionary appeals from interlocutory orders. Amend. The Committee proposes amended Rule 5 to: 1) clarify that the petition for an interlocutory appeal must be filed after the trial court’s signed order resolving the motion or issue before the trial court has been entered; and 2) add an adversary committee note further clarifying what orders qualify as the trial court’s signed order.

URAP020. Computation and enlargement of time. Amend. The Committee proposes amending Rule 22 to: 1) change enlargement of time to extension of time throughout the rule for consistency; 2) move the stipulation language from Rule 26 to Rule 22 so the procedures for extensions of time can be found in one rule; 3) increase the amount of stipulated requests for extensions of time to up to 60 days; 4) clarify that stipulated requests for enlargements of time will be granted automatically without a court order; 5) remove paragraph (c) Ex parte motion as these are rarely used and can be filed as a regular motion for extension of time; and 5) clean-up for clarity and consistency.

URAP026. Filing and serving briefs. Amend. The Committee proposes amending Rule 26 to: 1) remove the language regarding stipulated requests for extensions of time; 2) add a paragraph directing parties to Rule 22 to find the procedures for requesting an extension of time; and 3) clean-up for clarity and consistency.

URAP027. Form of briefs, motions, and other documents. Amend. The Committee proposes amending Rule 27 to: 1) change the language in paragraph (a) Typeface from “a plain, roman style with serifs” to “plain and legible”; and 2) remove the cross reference to Rule 3 in paragraphs (c)(1)(C) and (d)(1)(C).

This entry was posted in URAP005, URAP020, URAP026, URAP027.

One thought on “Rules of Appellate Procedure – Comment Period Closed February 2, 2026”

Cheryl Siler

February 2, 2026 at 4:55 pm

URAP 26 – As proposed URAP 26(b)(4) sets the deadline for the cross-appellant’s reply brief as “within 30 days after the filing and service of the appellant’s reply brief.” Triggering the deadline off the “filing and service” of the reply brief is somewhat problematic in that the date of filing of the brief and the date of service of the brief may not occur on the same day. I note that in other sections of URAP 26(b), the triggering event is simply the date of “service” of the preceding brief. See proposed URAP 26(b)(2) and (3). It would be clearer and more consistent if the deadline in Rule 26(b)(4) were also triggered by the “service” of the preceding brief.

Thank you for your time and consideration.