Here are some recent news items of interest to attorneys and court-watchers:
- California courts spent nearly half-billion dollars on court reporters, but that’s not enough. (Via Ben Shatz.)
- So if a court reporter isn’t available, SB 662 would allow electronic recordings to create the appellate record. Stiff court reporter lobby opposition expected. (Via Ben Shatz.)
- The Judicial Council has invited comment on 6 proposed changes affecting appellate rules, including
- (1) changing the notice of appeal form to allow the attorney to join the appeal (such as in appeal from sanctions against the attorney), and highlighting the requirement to specify the date of the order being appealed (so that it is not overlooked);
- (2) allowing early filing of the Appellant's Appendix (which could assist where a petition for supersedeas (stay) is involved), and to allow a respondent to elect to file a Respondent’s Appendix even if the appellant elects to use a clerk's transcript;
- (3) allowing broader use of video appearance for oral arguments;
- (4) changing the form application for extension of time to file a brief to indicate work done to date on the appeal. (See here.)
- Frustrated when a corporate defendant stays a case by appealing from a denial of a motion to compel arbitration? SB 365 would end the automatic stay for such appeals. (Via Ben Shatz.)
- Supreme Librarians: David Carrillo and Stephen Duvernay say that our state high court exists to maintain consistency and clarity in the law – not to correct errors. (Via Ben Shatz.)