All Appellate Lawyers Need Is Just A Little Patience

Last week, the Wisconsin Supreme Court granted 12 petitions for reviews and denied numerous others.  Conspicuously absent from this list was my clients' petition for review in Melchert v. Pro Electric Contractors.  As you can see, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals' decision adverse to my clients was filed on March 11, 2015.  I timely filed my clients' Petition For Review on April 9th, and my adversaries timely filed their response on April 21st.  Over 9 months later, we're still waiting to find out whether or not the Wisconsin Supreme Court will take the case.

As an experienced appellate lawyer, such delays no longer surprise me.  The Court of Appeals typically files its decisions 4-6 months after the last brief is filed, but there are some exceptions.  In Reichertz v. Gullickson, the Court of Appeals did not file its twelve-paragraph, per curium decision affirming a default judgment until almost 8 months after the last brief was filed.  The Melchert decision itself was filed over 9 months after the last brief was filed.

Delays often occur before the first brief is filed.  The Court of Appeals needs most of the documents filed in the trial court ("the record on appeal"), as well as transcripts of the trial and motion hearings.  It has to rely on the trial court judge's court reporter to file and serve these transcripts within 60 days after payment arrangements were made by the party that requested them.  My experience is that the Court of Appeals regularly grants court reporters extensions of the 60-day deadline even when the court reporter has not requested an extension prior to the expiration of this deadline.       

Delays often occur during the briefing schedule as well.  After the record on appeal is filed, appellants have 40 days to file their brief and appendix.  Thereafter, respondents have 30 days to file their response brief and appellants have 15 days after that to file their reply brief.  Appellate lawyers often ask for extensions of these deadlines, and I have learned over time that it is fruitless to oppose such motions.  I have often seen the Court of Appeals accept heavy workload as an excuse, even though such excuses would never fly with most trial court judges.  Then again, I appreciate this leniency when I really need it, such as when I sought an extension for filing Appellants' Brief And Appendix in Melchert because my former office (which was in a basement) had flooded and remained in an unsafe condition for over a week.

As an experienced appellate lawyer, I am used to riding the storm out and seeing my clients' appeals through to the end.  Please contact me at rudolphkuss@stevensandkuss.com so that we can discuss your options on appeal.