 |
| Overview of Appellate Procedure in Civil Cases |
If either party to the case is dissatisfied after the trial court renders a judgment, that party can file an appeal in an appellate court. The party who files the appeal is called the appellant, and the other party is called the appellee. Both the winning party and the losing party have a right to appeal in a civil case. For example, the winning party might think he/she did not receive as much money in damages as the case warranted. The losing party might think a judgment should not have been entered against him/her. The party who files the appeal has the burden of convincing the appellate court that the trial court committed a procedural error or an error in its interpretation of the law. Appellate procedure refers to the rules and practices used by the appellate court in reviewing a trial court's judgment.
What judgments can be appealed?
As a general rule, a judgment has to be a final judgment in order for a litigant to file an appeal. This final judgment rule means that the appellate court has authority over a case only after there is a decision that ends the lawsuit on the merits and leaves nothing for the trial court to do but execute the judgment. There are several exceptions to the final judgment rule. Certain interlocutory or non-final orders or decisions are appealable. Interlocutory orders or decisions can be appealed if they raise the issue of whether the trial court has subject matter judgment, if they involve a constitutional question, or if they assert that the trial court has committed a plain error.
What are the standards of review?
Standards of review refer to what the appellant must show in order for the appellate court to reverse or overturn the trial court's judgment.
The appellate court reviews a judgment to determine if substantial evidence supported the trial court's decision. If not, the judgment will be reversed.
Abuse of discretion is another standard of review. Under this standard, the appellate court looks at whether the trial judge properly exercised his/her judicial discretion in making a ruling in the case.
The harmless error standard means that a judgment may not be set aside for insignificant errors that do not influence the outcome of the trial.
Under the clearly erroneous standard, the appellate court has authority to review the trial court's factual findings.
De novo review refers to the authority the appellate court to review the trial court's conclusions on questions of the application, interpretation, and construction of law.
The plain error doctrine allows an appellate court to review errors not preserved in the record when those errors would result in a miscarriage of justice or seriously affect the basic fairness, integrity, and public reputation of the judicial process.
What procedures must the parties follow in an appeal?
The federal appellate courts are governed by the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (pdf). State appellate courts are governed by their state's rules of appellate procedure. In general, the appellant files a notice of appeal. The appellant must submit a trial court record, which includes a transcript of the trial. Both sides prepare written briefs that state the questions raised on appeal. Briefs contain arguments to support each party's position. They include citations to legal authorities that support the arguments made by each side. Most appeals are decided on the briefs submitted by the parties, but a few states permit oral argument in every appeal. If an oral argument is held, the appellate court questions the attorneys for both sides in order to clarify the legal issues presented in the briefs.
Related Resources on lawyers.com
- Attorney Client Relationship articles and information
- Find an attorney by area of law
- Legal System Message Boards for more help |
