IDENTIFYING ISSUES ON appeal, scheduling and concerns about stricter page limits for briefs were among the areas most often discussed in written comments addressed to the Supreme Court as it moves toward accepting nearly all trial court appeals.

Currently, up to two-thirds of appeals that are filed are declined or summarily affirmed without briefing, but the court has announced that, effective Sept. 1, it intends to institute a new process for accepting virtually all appeals.

This spring, the court released proposed rules to govern the new process and more than a dozen attorneys and court personnel responded with written comments in advance of a May 30 comment period deadline.

Among the entities commenting was the NHBA Committee on Cooperation with the Courts. Chair Bruce W. Felmly wrote on behalf of the committee on a number of areas of concern, including the need for at least a brief identification of issues to be appealed.

"One suggestion that was widely favored by the committee was a provision that would require counsel involved in the appeal to exchange information with respect to issues to be raised on appeal or cross-appeal to enable them to identify adequate pages of the transcript and to identify the documents to compose the record on appeal," Felmly wrote. "The thought here was not to create a straightjacket of issues, but to rely upon the good faith of counsel or the parties in the appeal to avoid delays that may occur in the assembly of the record or transcript."

Doreen Connor, of Wiggin & Nourie, said the court’s treatment of matters pending while on appeal was adequate and urged the court not to exclude family law matters from the non-discretionary acceptance policy – an idea suggested by attorney Charles S. Douglas in an article in the May 9, 2003 Bar News and elaborated on in comments he submitted to the court.

Connor also urged the court to avoid taking too hard a stance on motions for extensions of time. Noting that practitioners who argue appeals before the Supreme Court also practice in many other state and federal courts, she said that conflicts with deadlines are unavoidable. "I urge the Court to reconsider its position on extensions in the context of briefing schedules and oral argument," Connor wrote. "A few additional weeks in the final disposition of most cases because of counsel’s conflicting trial commitments, pre-planned vacations or family issues will not unduly interfere with the efficient disposition of cases and it will greatly improve the lives of those who regularly practice before you."

Another attorney who actively practices in the district court, Fred K. Mayer III of Nashua, asked the court to retain a procedure of "summary affirmance" in landlord-tenant matters.

These and other comments on the appellate process are posted under News Releases. See the home page for details.

Home | About the Bar | For Members | For the Public | Legal Links | Publications | Online Store
Lawyer Referral Service | Law-Related Education | NHBA•CLE | NHBA Insurance Agency | NHMCLE
Search | Calendar

New Hampshire Bar Association
2 Pillsbury Street, Suite 300, Concord NH 03301
phone: (603) 224-6942 fax: (603) 224-2910
email: NHBAinfo@nhbar.org
© NH Bar Association Disclaimer