Appellate Practice
Jan. 4, 2006
Courts' Response to Shoddy Appellate Practice? Pony Up!
Foucs Column - By Benjamin Shatz and Michael M. Berger - Once upon a time conventional wisdom held that appellate courts were too busy and too above the fray of trial-court litigation to get their hands messy with something as distasteful as imposing sanctions. If ever that were true, it is no longer.
Benjamin G. Shatz
Partner, Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP
Appellate Law (Certified), Litigation
Email: bshatz@manatt.com
Benjamin is a certified specialist in appellate law who co-chairs the Appellate Practice Group at Manatt in the firm's Los Angeles office. Exceptionally Appealing appears the first Tuesday of the month.
Michael M. Berger
Senior Counsel, Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP
2049 Century Park East
Los Angeles , CA 90067
Phone: (310) 312-4185
Fax: (310) 996-6968
Email: mmberger@manatt.com
USC Law School
Michael M. Berger is senior counsel at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP, where he is co-chair of the Appellate Practice Group. He has argued four takings cases in the U.S. Supreme Court.
Once upon a time conventional wisdom held that appellate courts were too busy and too above the fray of trial-court litigation to get their hands messy with something as distasteful as imposing sanctions. If ever that were true, it is no longer.
Certainly trial courts have more interaction with counsel, and thus more opportunity to sanction misbehavior. But four recent appellate decisions from four courts - issued in the span of only two days - should dispel any belief that the app...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In