Court Opinion

ID: 9473942
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 04:44:10.851459+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:43:49.934580
License: Public Domain

A. LEON HIGGINBOTHAM, Jr., Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I join in Judge Seitz’s opinion — because it is a balanced and accurate analysis of current law. However, I write separately to note my view that the current law on this issue seems totally inconsistent with basic concepts of justice and fairness. It is understandable that, in a variety of circumstances, a litigant might be denied his day in court because of the negligence of his lawyer. However, in those instances, the litigant may very well have a remedy in a malpractice action. Where, as here, substantive rights are irretrievably lost because of the action of either the judge or the court staff, there is no remedy for the litigant, and a person who may have a most viable and valid claim can be forever denied relief because of the negligence of a clerk of court or a judge.
Furthermore, the doctrine that lack of notice of a final judgment cannot affect the running of the time for appeal makes practically no sense in light of the way the real world actually functions. We have created a ludicrous situation where the only way a *47litigant can protect himself would be to check all of the dockets of the court and make inquiries daily, and even then must rely, at his or her own peril, on information that may itself be erroneous. In a court with thousands of active cases on its docket, should we require such burdensome measures? It would be an impossible burden for the vast majority of litigants whose lawyers do not have extensive staff to monitor the clerk’s office and to catch clerical errors that may be made by either the court or the clerk’s staff.
By today’s decision the majority intends to reinforce the obligation of attorneys to monitor the progress of their cases, and to preserve the finality of judgments. Though these are laudable goals, I have no doubt as to what the most notable effect will be: litigants who cannot afford the services of large law firms with substantial support staff will suffer. It is my hope that further injustices of this magnitude can he prevented by either an appropriate modification of Rule 4(a) or the action of Congress.