vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Alegato oral en apelaciones civiles | California Courts | Self Help Guide
Prepare sus puntos clave en un esquema que le ayude a tener claros los puntos que quiere exponer.

Practique su alegato
Practique su alegato con interrupciones. Es recomendable usar su esquema y practicar con otros.
En la corte, puede optar por usar parte de su tiempo para responder al alegato de la otra parte. Vuelva a leer el escrito de la otra parte y trate de pensar en lo que van a alegar. Practique su respuesta.
También debería ponerse en los zapatos de la corte de apelaciones y pensar en las preguntas que esta podría hacerle. Puede volver a repasar su esquema para asegurarse de cubrir todos los puntos importantes, ya que no dispondrá de tiempo extra aunque los jueces le quiten mucho tiempo con preguntas.

Vea algunos alegatos
Trate de visitar la corte y observar alegatos orales antes de la fecha de su alegato. Llame a la oficina del secretario para asegurarse de ir un día en el que haya programados alegatos orales. El alegato está abierto al público, por lo que no necesita un permiso especial para ir.

En el alegato oral

Normalmente, las personas comienzan su alegato oral en la corte de apelaciones con las palabras "Con la venia de la corte". Si quiere reservar tiempo para responder a la otra parte, tiene que comunicárselo a la corte inmediatamente.
Webcast Library | Supreme Court of California
Webcast Library | Supreme Court of California

 Skip to main content
 

 

Skip to main content.

Judicial Branch of California

Supreme Court

Courts of Appeal

Superior Courts

Judicial Council

 

 

Home

Case Information
 

Docket Search

Oral Arguments

Webcast Library

Oral Arguments Calendar

Briefs of Argued Cases

Pending Issues Summary

Weekly Conference Results

Matters Scheduled for Conference

Weekly Case Summaries

Minutes

Case Information
 

Opinions
 

Recent Opinions

Forthcoming Opinions

Opinions
 

E-Filing & Procedures
 

Administrative & Standing Orders

E-Filing

Frequently Asked Questions

Representation of Death Penalty Inmates

E-Filing & Procedures
 

News and Events

About the Court
 

Justices of the Court

Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero

Associate Justice Carol A. Corrigan

Associate Justice Goodwin H. Liu

Associate Justice Leondra R. Kruger

Associate Justice Joshua P. Groban

Associate Justice Martin J. Jenkins

Associate Justice Kelli Evans

Past & Present Justices

Court Committees & Programs

The Court and the Judicial Branch

California Courts Overview

Court History

Court Locations and Contacts

Careers and Internships

About the Court
 

Search

 Search

The State's Highest Court 

 

Supreme Court

Case Information

Oral Arguments

Webcast Library

Webcast Library

Upcoming and Archived Webcasts

This page provides access to upcoming and archived hearings. Please note that live hearing links will appear 30 minutes before the start of the webcast.

2024 Oral Argument Webcasts

Cases
Date Argued
Opinion
People v. Frazier (Robert Ward), [Automatic Appeal], S148863
05/09/2024
 
People v. Wilson (Javance Mickey), [Automatic Appeal], S118775
05/09/2024
 
People v. Lynch (Deandre), S274942
05/09/2024
 
People v. Nadey (Giles Albert, Jr.), [Automatic Appeal], S087560
04/03/2024
Webcast Library | Supreme Court of California
Brown (Dajah), S271877
01/06/2023
PDF
In re Ferrell (Tyree) on Habeas Corpus, S265798
01/06/2023
PDF
In re Jenkins (Jasmine) on Habeas Corpus, S267391
01/06/2023
PDF
In re Lopez (Rico Ricardo) on Habeas Corpus, S258912
01/06/2023
PDF

2022 Oral Argument Webcasts

Cases
Date Argued
Opinion
People v. Brown (Heather Rose), S257631
12/07/2022
PDF
Travis (Arnette) et al. v. Brand (Bill) et al. (Redondo Beach Waterfront, LLC, et al., Appellants), S268480
12/07/2022
PDF
In re Cabrera (Miguel Angel) on Habeas Corpus, S271178
12/07/2022
PDF
People v. McWilliams (Duvanh Anthony), S268320
12/07/2022
PDF
Memorial Session for Justice John A. Arguelles
12/07/2022
 
People v. Waldon (Billy Ray), [Automatic Appeal], S025520
11/02/2022
PDF
People v. Thomas (Justin Heath), [Automatic Appeal], S161781
11/02/2022
PDF
People v. Espinoza (Juventino), S269647
11/02/2022
PDF
In re D.P., S267429
11/02/2022
PDF
People v. Tacardon (Leon William), S264219
10/03/2022

PDF

People v. Delgadillo (Jose), S266305
10/03/2022

PDF
Reply Brief – California Appellate Courts
Reply Brief – California Appellate Courts

 

CALIFORNIA JUDICIAL BRANCH HOME
 

Appeals TimelineOverview of a caseOverview of a case
Prepare DocumentsForms needed during a case
Knowledge CenterIn-depth articles and resourcesIn-depth articles and resources

Introduction
Step by Step

Appealable Order
Notice of Appeal
Designating the Record
Additional Filings
Appellant’s Opening Brief
Respondent’s Brief
Reply Brief
Oral Argument
Court Opinion
Petition for Review
Remittitur

Forms
Videos
Glossary

EN

ES

Sign InRegistrarse

Menu

 

7. Appellant’s Reply Brief
The appellant’s reply brief is the final brief of the appeal process. The reply brief is optional.
The appellant’s only job in the reply brief is to challenge the legal arguments in the respondent’s brief. The appellant does not need to file a reply brief if they believe there are no legal issues in the respondent’s brief that must be addressed.
The appellant cannot raise new issues in the reply brief or repeat arguments from the opening brief.
Here’s an overview of what to expect in this step of the appeal process and how to write an appellant’s reply brief.
See a sample respondent’s brief 
Timeline of an Appellant’s Reply Brief
The appellant files a reply brief and proof of service with the Court of Appeal within 20 days after the respondent’s brief is filed.
The appellant must serve a copy of the reply brief to all parties in the case, the trial court judge, and the Supreme Court of California BEFORE filing the original reply brief with the Court of Appeal.
If the respondent does not file a respondent’s brief then the appellant does not file a reply brief.
There is no default period and the appellant will not receive a notice from the court about the deadline to file a reply brief.

If an appellant needs more time to file a reply brief, they must give the Court of Appeal good cause and file a stipulation to extend time or file an application for an extension before the deadline to file the brief.
Glossary – California Appellate Courts
En algunos casos, los hechos de notorio y público conocimiento requieren la presentación de una solicitud o moción para ser admitidos por la corte.In propria personaWhen someone represents themselves, without a lawyer.IncumplimientoCuando una parte no cumple con un plazo para pagar un arancel o presentar un documento.ÍndiceListado de todas las secciones de un escrito, con indicación del número de página.Índice de autoridadesListado de toda la jurisprudencia, leyes y doctrina utilizados en un escrito, con el número de página donde aparece cada una de las referencias.Interested entity or personAn individual person or an organization, business, firm, or partnership that has a financial or other interest in what happens in a case.JudgmentThe final decision of the trial court. Usually this is the end of the case in the trial court.Judicial noticeItems the court accepts without proof, including well-known and indisputable facts, rules of court, rules of professional conduct, decisional and public statutory law of California, and the definitions of English words and legal expressions. In some cases judicial notice may require a proper motion or application to the court.JurisdicciónPoder y autoridad de la corte para entender un caso y decidir sobre él.JurisdictionThe power and authority of the court to hear and decide a case.Justa causaMotivo legalmente válido para hacer lo que se está haciendo.Legal authorities or legal authorityExamples from the law that help prove a legal argument to the court, such as case decisions, statutes, and rules of court. Also called legal precedents and legal sources, they may be found on the internet or at a law library.LeyesNormas aprobadas por la Legislatura del estado o por el Congreso.Limited Civil CaseA type of civil case involving an amount of money less than $25,000.
Glossary – California Appellate Courts
A settled statement may also be called a settled statement.StatutesThe laws passed by the state Legislature or Congress.StipulationA written agreement between the parties.Submit for decisionThe final step when all of the briefing is completed and oral argument, if requested, has been heard, and the case is ready for decision. The next step is the appellate court issuing an opinion.Summary judgmentA court decision based on statements and evidence presented without a trial. It is requested in a motion when there is no dispute about the facts of the case.Superior courtThe trial court. It deals with all criminal and civil cases in the California state courts.Table of authoritiesA list of all of the legal cases, statutes, and secondary authority used in a brief, with the page number where each is included.Table of contentsA list of all the sections in a brief with the page number.Tasa judicialCantidad de dinero que debe pagar una persona para presentar ciertos documentos ante la corte.Tercero interesadoPersona o entidad, negocio, empresa o sociedad con un interés financiero o de otro tipo en el desenlace de un caso.Transcripción del secretario de la corteCompilación de los documentos presentados o registrados en el caso ante la corte inferior. La corte superior debe preparar la transcripción del secretario de la corte de conformidad con la designación del expediente y las normas 8.122 y 8.144 del Reglamento de las Cortes de California (CRC).Transcripción del taquígrafoRegistro palabra por palabra de los procedimientos orales, de todo lo que se dijo en la corte durante el juicio o audiencia en presencia de un taquígrafo.TratadoLibro de contenido jurídico que aborda todas las cuestiones de un campo en particular, p. ej., derecho penal, o contratos.TreatiseA legal textbook that has all the law about a particular area, like criminal law or contracts.Trial courtThe superior court where the case was decided.
Webcast Library | Supreme Court of California
PDF
People v. Nieves (Sandi Dawn), [Automatic Appeal], S092410
02/02/2021
PDF
People v. Vivar (Robert Landeros), S260270
02/02/2021
PDF
People v. Steskal (Maurice Gerald), [Automatic Appeal], S122611
02/02/2021
PDF
In re Humphrey (Kenneth) on Habeas Corpus, S247278
01/05/2021
PDF
Brown (Yazmin) et al. v. USA Taekwondo et al., S259216
01/05/2021
PDF
Smith (Jeremiah) v. LoanMe, Inc., S260391
01/05/2021
PDF
Villanueva (Manny) et al. v. Fidelity National Title Company, S252035
01/05/2021
PDF
In re A.R., S260928
01/05/2021
PDF
Kaanaana (David) et al. v. Barrett Business Services, Inc., et al., S253458
01/05/2021
PDF

2020 Oral Argument Webcasts

Case
Date Argued
Opinion
Donohue (Kennedy) v. AMN Services, LLC, S253677
12/01/2020
PDF
G. (O.) v. Superior Court of Ventura County (People, Real Party in Interest), S259011
12/01/2020
PDF
People v. Wilson (Byron), [Automatic Appeal], S087533
12/01/2020
PDF
People v. Chhoun (Run Peter), [Automatic Appeal], S084996
12/01/2020
PDF
Vazquez (Gerardo) et al. v. Jan-Pro Franchising International, Inc., S258191
11/03/2020
Alegato oral en apelaciones civiles | California Courts | Self Help Guide
Select your mobile carrier
Select your mobile carrierBoost MobileCricket WirelessAlltelGoogle FiMetroPCSAT&TRepublic WirelessSprintT-MobileVerizonU.S. CellularVirgin Mobile

 We'll only use this mobile number to send this link
 

Alegato oral
Durante el alegato oral, usted puede:
aclarar los puntos que expuso en su escrito
decir a la corte de apelaciones lo que considera más importante de sus argumentos
responder las preguntas de los jueces de la corte de apelaciones
El alegato oral no es un momento para replantear los hechos del caso o repetir partes del escrito.
Los jueces saben lo que usted dijo en su escrito. El alegato oral es el momento de asegurarse de que la corte entiende las cuestiones clave del caso destacando lo que usted considera más importante de su caso o preguntando a los jueces si tienen alguna pregunta que usted pueda responder.
Si su caso está en la división de apelaciones de la corte superior, tendrá hasta 10 minutos para presentar su alegato (a menos que la corte le dé más o menos tiempo). Si su caso está en la Corte de Apelaciones, tendrá hasta 30 minutos para presentar su alegato (a menos que la corte le dé más o menos tiempo).
No está obligado a participar en el alegato oral si no quiere. Puede decirle a la corte de apelaciones que quiere renunciar al alegato oral.
Webcast Library | Supreme Court of California
03/01/2022
PDF
People v. Padilla (Mario Salvador), S263375
03/01/2022
PDF
People v. Parker (Calvin Lamont), [Automatic Appeal], S113962
03/01/2022
PDF
Conservatorship of the Person and Estate of Eric B., S261812
02/02/2022
PDF
People v. Bloom (Robert Maurice), [Automatic Appeal], S095223
02/02/2022
PDF
In re Christopher L., S265910
02/02/2022
PDF
People v. Lopez (Pedro), S261747
01/12/2022
PDF
People v. Bracamontes (Manuel), [Automatic Appeal], S139702
01/12/2022
PDF

2021 Oral Argument Webcasts

Case
Date
Opinion
Berroteran (Raul II) v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (Ford Motor Company, Real Party in Interest), S259522
12/07/2021
PDF
Lopez (Marisol) v. Ledesma (Glenn) et al., S262487
12/07/2021
PDF
Sheen (Kwang K.) v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., S258019
12/07/2021
PDF
Segal (Mickey) et al. v. ASICS America Corporation et al., S263569
11/03/2021
PDF
Jane Doe v. Olson (Curtis), S258498
11/03/2021
PDF
Lawson (Wallen) v. PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc., S266001
11/03/2021
PDF
People v. Tirado (Jose Guadalupe), S257658
11/03/2021
PDF
People v.
California Rules of Court: Title Eight Rules
Rule 8.540. Remittitur
Rule 8.544. Costs and sanctions
Rule 8.548. Decision on request of a court of another jurisdiction
Rule 8.552. Transfer for decision

Division 2. Rules Relating to Death Penalty Appeals and Habeas Corpus Proceedings
Former rule 8.600. Renumbered effective April 25, 2019.

Chapter 1. General Provisions
Rule 8.601. Definitions

Chapter 2. Automatic Appeals From Judgments of Death

Article 1. General Provisions
Rule 8.603. In general
Rule 8.605. Qualifications of counsel in death penalty appeals

Article 2. Record on Appeal
Rule 8.608. General provisions
Rule 8.610. Contents and form of the record
Rule 8.611. Juror-identifying information
Rule 8.613. Preparing and certifying the record of preliminary proceedings
Rule 8.616. Preparing the trial record
Rule 8.619. Certifying the trial record for completeness
Rule 8.622. Certifying the trial record for accuracy
Former rule 8.625. Certifying the record in pre-1997 trials [Repealed]

Article 3. Briefs, Hearing, and Decision
Rule 8.630. Briefs by parties and amicus curiae
Rule 8.631. Applications to file overlength briefs in appeals from a judgment of death
Rule 8.634. Transmitting exhibits; augmenting the record in the Supreme Court
Rule 8.638. Oral argument and submission of the cause
Rule 8.642. Filing, finality, and modification of decision; rehearing; remittitur

Chapter 3. Death Penalty-Related Habeas Corpus Proceedings
Rule 8.652. Qualifications of counsel in death penalty-related habeas corpus proceedings

Division 3. Rules Relating to Miscellaneous Appeals and Writ Proceedings

Chapter 1.
California State Library Senior Staff - California State Library
Prior to joining the State Library he worked at the California Department of Justice Office of the Attorney General and previously served as Deputy Legal Affairs Secretary for Governor Schwarzenegger’s Office.
As General Counsel Scott provides and manages all legal services, advice, and representation for the California State Library and California Library Services Board. He collaborates with the different Library bureaus to deliver creative solutions or develop novel ideas pertaining to the various programs, policies, and planning which includes digital platforms, collection and copyright issues, and state and federal grant programs. Scott is the legal advisor to senior staff and management in providing responsive leadership and direction to help the Library successfully carry out its mission. He provides legal opinions or responses to substantive legal issues, policies, legislation, and transactional documents.
Scott earned his Juris Doctorate from Lincoln Law School of Sacramento and a Bachelor of Arts in Political Communication from California State University, Sacramento.
 

Natalie Cole
Bureau Chief, Library Development Services

Natalie Cole was appointed Library Development Services Bureau Chief in November 2020. Natalie joined the State Library in May 2016 and has served as Library Programs Consultant and Assistant Bureau Chief in Library Development Services. Prior to joining the State Library, she was the interim Executive Director of the California Library Association. Natalie holds a Ph.D. and M.A. in Librarianship from the University of Sheffield, U.K.
As Library Development Services Bureau Chief, Natalie oversees the administration of state and federal grant programs for California libraries. In addition to grant-making, Library Development Services works to enhance library collaboration and resource-sharing, and provides consulting services to public libraries and associated groups and organizations. These activities help libraries support existing programs, develop innovative new programs, extend and enhance library services across the state, and achieve the greatest benefit from funding sources.
 

Jessica “Jessie” Knox-Jensen
Bureau Chief, State Library Services

Jessica “Jessie” Knox-Jensen was appointed State Library Services Bureau Chief in March 2020. Jessie initially joined the California State Library in November 2018 as the State Library Services Assistant Bureau Chief. Prior to her arrival at the Library, Jessie held various positions at the California State Archives. Jessie earned a Master of Library and Information Science degree from San Jose State University and a Master of Arts degree in Public History from Sacramento State University.
Tentative Rulings | Superior Court of California | County of Tulare
(1) The party has a substantial interest in the action as a whole.
(2) The health of the party is such that a preference is necessary to prevent prejudicing the party’s interest in the litigation.”
Further, subsection (c) states:
“(c) Unless the court otherwise orders:
(1) A party may file and serve a motion for preference supported by a declaration of the moving party that all essential parties have been served with process or have appeared.
(2) At any time during the pendency of the action, a party who reaches 70 years of age may file and serve a motion for preference.”
Finally, subsection (f) states “Upon the granting of such a motion for preference, the court shall set the matter for trial not more than 120 days from that date and there shall be no continuance beyond 120 days from the granting of the motion for preference except for physical disability of a party or a party’s attorney, or upon a showing of good cause stated in the record. Any continuance shall be for no more than 15 days and no more than one continuance for physical disability may be granted to any party.”
Here, Plaintiffs have not petitioned the Court. Plaintiffs have not filed or served a motion for preference. The Court’s setting of trial at the Case Management Conference could not have been in accordance with section 36(f) as the trial date was not set within the 120-day required period. 
This case may, in fact, be entitled to priority status under section 36, but that issue has not been adjudicated. 
Therefore, the Court is inclined to grant the motion for continuance and continue the trial to a date no later than 180 days beyond the current trial date. 
If no one requests oral argument, under Code of Civil Procedure section 1019.5(a) and California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312(a), no further written order is necessary. The minute order adopting this tentative ruling will become the order of the court and service by the clerk will constitute notice of the order.
Re:                Lopez, an individual, Jose Antonio vs. Abundes, an individual, Palmira et al
Case No.:  PCU298526
California State Library Senior Staff - California State Library
She joined the California State Library in October 2016 as the State Library Services Bureau Chief. Prior to her arrival at the Library, Rebecca was Deputy State Archivist at the California State Archives, where she had worked since 2001. Previously, she was a Manuscripts and Photographs Curator at UC Davis in the Special Collections Department of the University Library. She also worked for the Yolo County Library System, including the Turner Branch in West Sacramento and the Yolo County Archives. She even spent one summer managing and driving the Yolo County Bookmobile.
As Deputy State Librarian, Rebecca oversees the “program and operations sides” of the California State Library, which include the State Library Services and Library Development Services bureaus. State Library Services is made up of the Braille and Talking Book Library, the California History Section, Information Services, the Government Publications Section, the Witkin State Law Library, and the Sutro Library (in San Francisco). The bureau is also responsible for the acquisition, cataloging, maintenance, and preservation of the State Library’s collections. Library Development Services administers state and federal grant programs for California’s libraries, works to enhance library collaboration and resource-sharing, and provides consulting services to public libraries and associated groups and organizations. These activities help libraries support existing programs, develop innovative new programs, extend and enhance library services across the state, and achieve the greatest benefit from funding sources.
Rebecca earned a Master of Library and Information Science degree from San Jose State University.
 

Scott Taylor
General Counsel, Office of Legal Services

Scott Taylor started his role as General Counsel of the Office of Legal Services for the California State Library in September 2020. Over his 17-year career as an attorney and senior counsel, Scott has advised clients and provided legal services in both the public and private sectors. Prior to joining the State Library he worked at the California Department of Justice Office of the Attorney General and previously served as Deputy Legal Affairs Secretary for Governor Schwarzenegger’s Office.
As General Counsel Scott provides and manages all legal services, advice, and representation for the California State Library and California Library Services Board. He collaborates with the different Library bureaus to deliver creative solutions or develop novel ideas pertaining to the various programs, policies, and planning which includes digital platforms, collection and copyright issues, and state and federal grant programs.