Source: https://www.bafirm.com/publication/procedures-before-appellate-courts-a-comparative-overview-of-the-fifth-circuit-and-texas-courts-of-appeal/
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 15:40:31+00:00

Document:
The appellate lawyer who usually practices in the Texas Courts of Appeals may be tempted to perfect an appeal by filing a cost bond in the Fifth Circuit within 30 days of the signing of the trial court’s judgment.1 Addressing this type of confusion of procedure is the purpose of this article.2 It compares the basic procedural steps in the Fifth Circuit with those in the Texas Courts of Appeal.
There are fundamental differences in the approaches taken by the federal and state courts. In federal court, appellate procedures are relatively simple. The Fifth Circuit supervises the preparation of the record, sends the lawyers forms for compliance with the appellate steps, and provides detailed written local rules to assist in compliance.
In contrast, in the state courts, no one is looking over a lawyer’s shoulder to supervise compliance with appellate rules. Lawyers must be more attentive to state procedural rules. The responsibility for filing the record and obtaining extensions is placed on the attorney, not the court, and only a few courts have written rules explaining their local practices.
The following comparison of the individual steps will demonstrate these differences in overall approach.
Courts of appeals have appellate jurisdiction in criminal cases except those in which the death penalty has been assessed or in which the fine imposed by a county court does not exceed $100 unless the sole issue is the constitutionality of the statute or ordinance on which the conviction is based.21 Through a 1987 amendment to Tex. Const. Art. V, §26, the State may appeal certain pre-trial and post-trial legal rulings.
In civil cases, when a district judge is of the opinion that (1) an order involves a controlling question of law (2) about which there is a substantial ground for difference of opinion and (3) an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of litigation, the court of appeals may, in its discretion, permit an appeal of such action.22 The trial proceedings, however, shall not be stayed unless so ordered by the district judge or court of appeals.23 Furthermore, in civil cases, when more than one claim for relief is presented in an action or when multiple parties are involved, the court may direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more, but fewer than all, of the claims or parties, only upon an express determination that there is no reason for delay and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment.24 There is no permissive right of appeal in criminal cases.
Unless one considers the court’s discretion to accept or reject petitions in original proceedings,25 there is no such thing as a court of appeals’ permissive jurisdiction.
(5) incurable jury argument if not otherwise ruled on by the trial court.
Within 10 days after filing the notice of appeal, the appellant has the responsibility to order from the court reporter a transcript of those parts of the proceedings he or she deems necessary and that are not already on file.45 This obligation is satisfied in the Fifth Circuit when the appellant completes the transcript order form provided by the district court clerk.46 Under federal and local rules, the appellant also must contact the court reporter to make satisfactory arrangements for payment of the cost of the transcript and must designate the form of payment on the order form.47 Unlike state court, the court reporter has the duty to file the transcript. If the appellant needs additional time to complete financial arrangements with the court reporter, he or she must contact the court of appeals case manager who handles the appropriate district. The internal operating procedures provide that the appellant should not complete the transcript order form until financial arrangements have been completed. Although failure to follow instructions may lead to dismissal, as a practical matter, the court of appeals will work with an attorney who shows reasonable efforts to comply with the federal and local rules.
The court reporter is responsible for filing extensions of time as proscribed by the clerk of court.61 A court reporter may be held in contempt and penalized part of his or her fee if orders of the court are ignored regarding extensions.
Record excerpts are not necessary. The court has in its files and will consider the entire record as brought forward by the parties.
The brief of the appellant is due within 40 days after the date on which the record is filed. The appellee shall serve and file a brief within 30 days after service of the brief of the appellant. The appellant may file a reply brief within 14 more days, but at least three days before argument.66 The clerk will normally grant the first unopposed request for an extension for 15 days.67Usually this does not require a written motion and the request may be made by phone with a confirming letter.
The brief of the appellant is due 30 days after the record is filed.68 Appellee’s or the State’s brief is due 25 days thereafter. There is no state procedure similar to the federal allowing for automatic extensions, extensions by the clerk, or extensions not in writing.
Similarly, briefs in civil cases shall not exceed 50 pages. Some courts also enforce this rule as to criminal briefs. The brief may be typewritten or printed. If typewritten, it must be double spaced.71 As to brief covers, courts of appeal are color blind.
The same principles apply in criminal cases except the court of appeals will review the guidelines more strictly.
Courts of Appeals are vested with general mandamus authority over district and county judges.89 Writs of mandamus will be granted only to correct an abuse of discretion,90 and the relator (the party seeking relief) must ordinarily show that there is no other adequate remedy available.91 Writs of mandamus and other original proceedings have their own requirements for presentment to the court,92 including the necessity for a motion for leave to file on which the court rules whether it will even consider the petition.
An appeal in an intermediate state appellate court takes different routes from an appeal in the intermediate federal court. The time of signing rather than entry of judgment is important and there are differing responsibilities for monitoring record preparation. Even the record has different names. While whole bodies of case law qualify each step, at least one general observation can be made: a lawyer clearly should not make assumptions about the procedure of one court based on familiarity with the procedure of the other court.
In a federal civil case, notice of appeal, not a cost bond, perfects the appeal and is filed 30 days after entry, not signing of judgment. In state court, unless waived (usually for a government entity), a cost bond or substitute must be filed 30 days after signing of the judgment.
More detailed references on federal appellate procedure are: M. Tigar, Federal Appeals: Jurisdiction & Practices (1987); Fifth Circuit Reporter (Issued monthly by the Bar Association of the Fifth Federal Circuit, 600 Camp St., New Orleans, LA 70130); for state practice: State Bar of Texas, Advance Appellate Practice Course (October 1987); Liberato & Peveto, Nuts & Jolts of Civil Appellate Practice, 50 Tex. B.J. 642 (June 1987).
28 U.S.C. §1292; see generally Hanby, Interlocutory Appeals in Federal Court, I Appellate Advocate (Appellate Practice & Advocacy Section Report) 8 (Winter 1988).
337 U.S. 541, 546 (1949); U.S. Armada Petroleum Corp., 700 F.2d 706, 708 (Temp. Emer. Ct. App. 1983). To qualify as a collateral order, the order must (1) conclusively determine a disputed question; (2) resolve an important issue completely separate from the merits of the action; and (3) as a practical matter, be unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment. Richardson-Merrell, Inc. v. Koller, 472 U.S. 429 (1985).
U.S. v. Spilotro, 786 F.2d 808, 812-813 (8th Cir. 1986).
Abney v. U.S., 431 U.S. 651, 658-662 (1977); U.S. v. Martin, 682 F.2d 506, 507-509 (5th Cir. 1982); U.S. v. Sneed, 705 F.2d 745, 746-49 (5th Cir. 1983); U.S. v. Barcelona, 814 F.2d 165, 167 (5th Cir. 1987).
U.S. v. Dunbar, 611 F.2d 985, 982 (5th Cir. 1980); U.S. v. Kalish, 690 F.2d 1144, 1153-54 (5th Cir. 1982).
U.S. v. Lee, 786 F.2d 951,955-56 (9th Cir. 1986).
U.S. v. Accardo, 749 F.2d 1477, 1479 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 106 S.Ct. 314 (1985).
U.S. v. Fernandez-Toedo, 749 F.2d 703, 705 (11th Cir. 1985).
U.S. v. Wison, 420 U.S. 332, 342-44 (1975); U.S. v. Martin Linen Supply Co., 430 U.S. 564, 569 (1977); U.S. v. Martinez, 763 F.2d 1297, 1309-1310 (11th Cir. 1985).
U.S. v. Scott, 437 U.S. 82, 91 n. 7 (1978); U.S. v. Leal, 781 F.2d 1108, 1110 (5th Cir. 1986).
Tex. Civ. Prac. Rem. Code Ann. §51.012 (Vernon 1986); Tex. Gov. Code §22.220 (Vernon Pamp. 1988). The most difficult aspect of this proscription is that of finality of judgment. To be final, and thus appealable, a judgment must dispose of all issues and parties in a case. Northeast Independent School Dist. v. Aldridge, 400 S.W.2d 893, 895 (Tex. 1966).
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. §51.014 (Vernon Supp. 1988).
Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. Art. 238-2 §A (Vernon 1983).
Tex. Code Crim. Pro. Art. 4.03 (Vernon Supp. 1988).
28 U.S.C. §1292(b). See, e.g., Aucoin v. Matador Serv., Inc., 749 F.2d 1180 (5th Cir. 1985). The procedure to be followed is described in Fed. R. App. P. 5.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Wolf v. Banco Nacional, 721 F.2d 662 (9th Cir. 1983).
See infra Section 6, “Time to Perfect Appeal.” The filing of a timely motion is jurisdictional. Berman v. United States, 378 U.S. 530 (1964); Williams v. Treen, 671 F.2d 892 (5th Cir. 1982).
Tex. R. App. P. 30(a).
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(b); Williams v. Bolger, 633 F.2d 410, 411 (5th Cir. 1980).
28 U.S.C. §1917; Fed. R. App. P. 3(e).
28 Tex. R. App. P. 40(a), 48.
Tex. R. App. P. 40(b)(1); Shute v. State, 744 S.W.2d 96 (Tex. Crim App. 1988).
Fed. R. App. R. 4(b).
Tex. R. App. P. 5(b)(1).
Tex. P. App. P. 41(a)(1). The timely filing of a cost bond is jurisdictional. Davis v. Massey, 561 S.W.2d 799, 801 (Tex. 1978).
Tex. R. App. P. 41(b)(1).
Poplar Grove v. Bache Halsey Stuart, 600 F.2d 1189 (5th Cir. 1979) (sets guidelines for fixing the amount of a supersedeas bond); Fed. R. App. 8(a).
Tex. R. App. P. 47(a).
Id. at 47(b); Cooper v. Bowser, 583 S.W.2d 805, 807 (Tex.App.–San Antonio 1979, no writ).
Tex. R. App. P. 47(b).
Fed. R. App. P. 10(b).
Fed. P. App. P. 10(a).
Tex. R. App. P. 51(a) sets out what the trial court clerk shall include in the transcript absent a designation by the parties. However, the careful practitioner will file a written designation of the record with the clerk of the trial court as provided by Tex. R. App. P. 50(b), because despite Rule 51’s proscription as to what should be in an undesignated record, the burden is on the appellant, or other party seeking review, to see that a sufficient record is presented to show error requiring reversal. Tex. R. App. P. 50(d).
Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(1). Failure to provide an adequate record on appeal may preclude processing of the record on appeal. See Stout v. Jefferson Co. Bd. Of Educ., 489 F.2d 97 (5th Cir. 1974).
Loc. R. 10.1 and I.O.P. thereunder.
Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(4); L.R. 10 and I.O.P. thereunder.
Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(3).
Tex. R. App. P. 50(d).
Id. at 54(c); Transcontinental Properties. Ltd. v. Taylor, 717 S.W.2d 890 (Tex. 1986).
Tex. R. App. P. at 53(a), 54(c); Container Port Serv. v. Gage, 719 S.W.2d 662 (Tex.App.– El Paso 1986, no writ).
B. D. Click v. Safari Drilling Co., 638 S.W.2d 860 (Tex. 1982); Men’s Warehouse v. Helms, 682 S.W.2d 429 (Tex.App.–Houston [1st Dist.] 1984, writ ref’d n.r.e.).
Tex. R. App. P. 53(d); Phaup v. Boswell, 731 S.W.2d 625 (Tex.App. [1st Dist.] 1987).
Fed. R. App. P. 11(b); Loc. R. 11.1 and I.O.P. thereunder.
Tex. R. App. P. 54(a).
Tex. R. App. P. 57.
Fed. R. App. P. 11(b); Loc. R., 11.1 and I.O.P. thereunder.
Tex. R. App. P. 73.
Fed. P. App. P. 31; Loc. R. 31.
Loc. R. 27.1 and I.O.P. thereunder.
Tex. R. App. P. 74(k), (m).
Fed. R. App. P. 27; Loc. R. 28.1. Violations of these limitations may result in the court’s refusal to accept the brief. Nelly v. Barker’s Trust Co. of Texas, 757 F.2d 621, 634 n. 18 (5th Cir. 1985).
Loc. R. 32 and I.O.P. thereunder.
Tex. R. App. P. 75(h), (j).
Tex. R. App. P. 74(i).
Loc. R. 34 and I.O.P. thereunder.
Fed. R. App. P. 34(a).
Tex. R. App. P. 75(a), (f), the best practice is to type “oral argument requested” on the cover, not on inside page, of the brief.
Fed. R. App. P. 40(a).
I.O.P. under Fed. R. App. P. 40.
Tex. R. App. P. 100(a).
Id. at 200(d); Dawkins v. Van Winkle, 377 S.W.2d 830 (Tex. 1964).
Fed. R. App. P. 38; Loc. R. 42.2.
Tex. R. App. P. 84.
Id.; see generally Hittner & Boudreaux, Frivolous Appeals in Texas, Tex. Bar J., April 1984, Steiner, Frivolous Appeals: An Update, I Appellate Advocate (State Bar Appellate Practice of Advocacy Section Report) 6 (Winter 1988).
In re E.E.O.C., 709 F.2d 392, 395 (5th Cir. 1983); 28 U.S.C. §1651; Fed. R. App. P. 21; Loc. R. 21.
Bauman v. United States District Court, 557 F.2d 650, 654-55 (9th Cir. 1977); In re Bendectin Prod. Liab. Litig., 749 F.2d 300 (6th Cir. 1984).
Johnson v. Fourth Court of Appeals, 700 S.W. 916, 917 (Tex. 1985).
State Bar v. Heard, 603 S.W.2d 829, 833 (Tex. 1980).
Tex. R. App. P. 121; see generally, Ray, The Mandamus Explosion, 28 S. Tex. L. Rev. 901 (1987).
For more information and case citations, please see “Federal False Claims Act and Qui Tam Litigation,” published by Law Journal Press (2006).
This website is designed to provide general information only. This information is not and should not be construed to be formal legal advice. The transmission of the information found on this website also does not result in the formation of a lawyer-client relationship.

References: §26
 §1292
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 §51
 §22
 v. 
 §51
 Art. 238
 Art. 4
 §1292
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 §1917
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 §1651
 v. 
 v. 
 v.