Appellate lawyers appointed to LASC!

 Congrats to Johnathan Eisenman:

Jonathan Eisenman, of Los Angeles County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. Eisenman has served as the Assistant General Counsel at the Los Angeles Department of Water & Power since 2025. He served as a Deputy City Attorney at the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office from 2018 to 2025. Eisenman worked as an Associate at Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland from 2015 to 2018. He served as a Law Clerk at the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California from 2014 to 2015 and from 2011 to 2012. Eisenman served as a Law Clerk at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit from 2012 to 2013. He was an associate at Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld from 2008 to 2011. Eisenman received a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Texas School of Law. He fills the vacancy created by the retirement of Judge Scott T. Millington. Eisenman is a Democrat.

And to Erin Reed:

Erin Reed, of Los Angeles County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. Reed has served as a Senior Appellate Court Attorney at the Second District Court of Appeal since 2017, where she also served as an Appellate Court Attorney from 2014 to 2017. Reed worked as an Associate at Collins & Collins from 2013 to 2014. She served as a Judicial Clerk at the New Mexico Court of Appeals from 2010 to 2013. Reed received a Juris Doctor degree from the University of California, Davis School of Law. She fills the vacancy created by the elevation of Judge Armen Tamzarian to the Court of Appeal. Reed is a Democrat.

9th Cir. scraps FRAP 26.1

FRAP 26.1 is that annoying rule about including a "disclosure statement" before the table of contents in your federal appellate brief. But as of this month, the Ninth has scrapped that FRAP. New Circuit Rule 28-1(c) says: "Unless otherwise required by Circuit Rule 26.1-1, the brief should not include a disclosure statement pursuant to FRAP 26.1."

Ok, so what does CR 26.1-1 say? It says all parties are supposed to file a Form 34 Disclosure Statement within 14 days of an appeal being docketed (CR 26.1-1(a)(2)) and must file a supplemental Form 34 whenever there is a need to do so. Nothing in CR 26.1-1 appears to "otherwise require" a disclosure within a brief. Thus, the days of disclosure pages in briefs appears over in the Ninth. And no one's going to miss them! (Hat tip to Laurie Hepler for highlighting this.)  

9th Cir. closed Dec. 24-26 this week!

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit will be closed on December 24, 2025 and December 26, 2025, as well as December 25, 2025. These additional days will be considered holidays for purposes of FRAP 26(a).

J.Scalia lives on

Bloomberg Law has Mentions of Justice Scalia Surge at Conservative-Dominated Court

References to the late Justice Antonin Scalia spiked during Supreme Court oral arguments this year, highlighting his lasting influence on how the court interprets the law. Justices and advocates have invoked Scalia’s name nearly three dozen times just since the current term began in October. That’s already on par with the number of references he’s received in most calendar years since he died in 2016, according to a Bloomberg Law analysis.

• Bloomberg Law reviewed more than 500 oral argument transcripts from February 2016 through December 2025 and identified more than 300 references to Scalia by name—averaging over 30 a year since 2018—across roughly 140 cases.
• No other former justice comes up as often.
• O’Connor, who retired in 2006 and died in 2023, was referenced roughly 50 times over the past decade, and Kennedy approximately 60 times since his retirement in 2018.

Former CJ Cantil-Sakauye's latest mission

The Recorder has Former Calif. Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye Talks About National Mission to Defend Judiciary -- After a 32-year career as a California judge, Cantil-Sakauye has joined the Alliance of Former Chief Justices "to be honest about the work we do" and "to continue to educate using the facts."

• Cantil-Sakauye is taking on another role, this time as a member of the fledgling Alliance of Former Chief Justices. The group of about 50 former state jurists was formed by the civic education and advocacy group Keep Our Republic, which also launched the Article III Coalition of retired federal judges in September.
• I'm in it to win it. It might be a long-range approach, but I think that's how we have to approach getting people to understand what the judiciary is, almost by one organization at a time, a group of young people at a time.
• I just believe if we don't do it, and we don't start it now, it'll never happen, and then the trust and confidence of the judiciary is totally undermined. We'll never get that back. There'll be a narrative we can never recover. And I think then it will truly be hopeless.

Tone check!

In this unpub from 1/5 (on page 8, footnote 5), appellant's counsel is chastised for bad tone:

In its reply brief, FanX accuses the trial judge of being “completely uninformed,” “disregard[ing] . . . California law,” and “abdicat[ing] . . . her duties as a judge” in denying the motion to vacate. It is a long-standing rule that an appellate brief “containing matter manifestly disrespectful toward the trial judge is to be deemed contempt of the appellate court.” (First Nat. Bank v. Superior Court (1909) 12 Cal.App. 335, 348.) We advise counsel for FanX to consider his language more carefully in the future when challenging a ruling of the trial court.

CRC 8.1115 "disapproval"

What does "disapproved" mean in CRC 8.1115(3)(2) ("After decision on review by the Supreme Court, ... a published opinion of a Court of Appeal in the matter, ... is citable and has binding or precedential effect, except to the extent it is inconsistent with the decision of the Supreme Court or is disapproved by that court.")? Well, per this published opinion from 1/5 today here, a reversal is an "unambiguous disapproval."

The fact that the court did not reach the merits of our analyses is inapposite. Having determined that the decision should be reversed because of new legislation, the court was not required to further signal its disapproval by adding a gratuitous, advisory discussion of the law that existed prior to the change.

See also on Law360 Supreme Court Term Limits Would Carry Hidden Risk

If we get that answer wrong, term limits could create a situation worse than the status quo: a permanent cadre of brand-name ex-justices leveraging their Supreme Court service in private practice, politics and business — precisely the kind of elite influence that term limit advocates say they want to curb.

And see Michael J. Broyde and Hayden Hall's Akron Law Review article: Do We Really Want Retired U.S. Supreme Curt Justices Practicing Law? (forthcoming, 2026). Available at SSRN:https://ssrn.com/abstract=5771063orhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5771063

Law360 roundup & more

 Recent articles of note on Law360:

Circuit-By-Circuit Guide To 2025's Most Memorable Moments

One of 2025's most memorable moments not just in the Ninth Circuit but also the entire appellate realm occurred in March, when Judge VanDyke posted a nearly 20-minute video dissent to YouTube in a firearms case.

California Justices OK Standards For Updated Bar Exam

The California Supreme Court on Thursday approved a proposed set of qualification standards for experts involved in developing California's bar exam in the wake of a botched administration of the exam in February.

Dems Offer Bill To Shine Light On High Court 'Shadow Docket'

Democratic lawmakers have introduced a bill that would require the U.S. Supreme Court to explain its "shadow docket" rulings, criticizing the high court for issuing "harmful, backwards decisions" that "impact millions of Americans' lives" but are often unaccompanied by a formal opinion.
The bill, titled the "Shadow Docket Sunlight Act of 2025," would require the justices to provide written explanations, and disclose who voted how, when deciding whether to temporarily stay lower court orders.

Fed. Circ. Stunned By 'Numerous' Flaws In Patent Appeal

"The problems with Cooperative's appellate arguments are almost too numerous to count," U.S. Circuit Judge Leonard P. Stark wrote for the panel. "They begin with Cooperative's characterization of its claims, which is newly minted on appeal and contradicts what Cooperative itself previously persuaded this court its claims mean."

Ex-State High Court Chiefs Start Group To Defend Rule Of Law (CA members = Tani Cantil-Sakayue and Ron George)

A group of over 40 former chief judges of state supreme courts across the country this week launched a new project to speak out against attacks on the judiciary's independence and educate about the rule of law. The Alliance of Former Chief Justices, an initiative within the nonpartisan civic education organization Keep Our Republic, debuted Monday.

Also see the new California State Bar website here.

The DJ has Judge Esther Ro followed her heart to a Superior Court seat -- A former appellate attorney [senior research attorney in 2/7, 2019-2024] and class action partner, Superior Court Judge Esther K. Ro draws on diversion tools, careful reasoning and experience to navigate the daily pressures of a high-volume misdemeanor courtroom.

For discussion of Govt. Code 68081, see the new section on Rehearing in this opinion here.

3d Cir. program to check briefs

On January 5, 2026, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit will implement a program that checks Opening, Response and Reply briefs for compliance pursuant to Federal and Local rules.

 The program will run in the background once a brief is uploaded in CM/ECF using either the Check PDF Document option via the Utilities menu or when docketing in cases using the Opening, Response and Reply brief events. Users are strongly encouraged to check their briefs using the "Check PDF document" utility before docketing an Opening, Response or Reply brief event. The utility does not "lock" a case or prevent others from filing. A template including all required sections for principal briefs will be provided, and its use is strongly recommended to avoid non-compliance orders. Please note that documents filed electronically must be in PDF text format - not scanned to PDF (See L.A.R. 113.3(b)). Detected deficiencies will not prevent users from completing an event, but correcting deficiencies before completion is strongly recommended to avoid non-compliance orders.

Deficiencies will be identified as Critical or Minor:
--Critical deficiencies will likely cause the brief to be rejected and require refiling.
--Minor deficiencies are presented for consideration and may not cause the brief to be rejected.

It is possible the program will detect deficiencies when none exist (e.g. additional text or characters in section headers, graphics, etc.). Please help us improve the program by emailing feedback to the CM/ECF Help Desk at ecf_helpdesk@ca3.uscourts.gov

Half-Time Research Atty job in Div. 7

Associate Justice John L. Segal of Division Seven of the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, located in Los Angeles, is accepting applications for a half-time judicial chambers attorney. The attorney will work collaboratively with the justice and other judicial attorneys to prepare opinions in a wide variety of cases. The attorney’s duties will include reviewing appellate briefs and trial records, researching and analyzing the law, identifying issues that may require further briefing, helping prepare draft opinions, reviewing and proofreading opinions by the justice, and performing other tasks assigned by the justice. Apply online at http://www.courts.ca.gov/careers and search for JO#6566.

 

RIP J.Ikuta (1954-2025)

 The MetNews reports Ninth Circuit Senior Judge Sandra S. Ikuta Dies

Sandra Ikuta, who was appointed to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2006, has died, one month after assuming senior status. The court did not make an announcement of her death. However, a memorandum opinion in an immigration case, filed yesterday, says in a footnote: “Judge Sandra Ikuta, who was a member of the panel at the time the case was argued, passed away on December 7, 2025. In accordance with General Order 3.2(h), this opinion (or memoranda) is issued by the remaining panel members as a quorum pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d).”

Law360 has 'Hardworking' 9th Circ. Senior Judge Sandra Ikuta Dies At 71

The DJ has Sandra S. Ikuta, 1954-2025: A leading conservative voice whose dissents influenced US Supreme Court

The Recorder has ‘Cared Deeply’: 9th Circuit Judge Sandra Ikuta Dies at 71

And see Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Mourns Passingof Judge Sandra Segal Ikuta 

J.Murray (ret.) publicly censured

Today the CJP issued a 38-page Decision & Order Imposing Public Censure and Bar Pursuant to Stipulation in In the Matter Concerning Former Justice William J. Murray, Jr., No. 211.

Former Justice Marray will not seek or hold judicial office, accept a position or an assignment as a judicial officer, subordinate judicial officer, or judge pro tem with any court in the State of California ....

The Recorder has Retired Justice Censured for Delaying Cases for Years -- Retired Third District Court of Appeal Justice William Murray Jr. agreed to the facts in the discipline agreement but said the findings lacked context.

The DJ has CJP issues public censure of ex-justice, leaves key questions unanswered -- Decision cites decade of chronic delays but remains silent on health issues, pension concerns raised by critics.

Law360 has Retired Calif. Judge Censured For Case Delays

Law360 also has Fla. Atty Faces Bar Referral Over 'Hallucinated' Case In Filing (opinion here):

Unfortunately, we're finding this problem arising more and more frequently. Just a few months ago, our court issued an opinion referring another lawyer to the Florida Bar for similarly relying on generative artificial intelligence to essentially write his appellate brief without checking the veracity of authorities cited in that brief. See Clerk of Ct. & Comptroller for 13th Jud. Cir., Hillsborough Cnty. v. Rangel, No. 2D20241772, 2025 WL 2486314 (Fla. 2d DCA Aug. 29, 2025).

Introductions in briefs

Bloomberg Law has Appeals Judges Push to Clearly Allow Introductions in Briefs

Two federal judges are urging the judiciary to tweak a rule to explicitly allow lawyers to include an “introduction” section at the top of their appellate briefs. Judge Kevin Newsom and Chief Judge William Pryor, both of the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, said in a letter that introductions are effectively lawyers’ “elevator pitch,” in that it “briefly introduces the dispute, tees up the key issues, and explains why they should be resolved in a particular way.” They’re asking the Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules to modify an existing rule “to permit—and perhaps subtly encourage” lawyers to lead with introductions in their written arguments.

...

While introductions aren’t banned under the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, they aren’t explicitly allowed either. .... that can lead to clerks’ offices rejecting briefs for violating court rules.

Watford to Chair The Appellate Project

 

As a former judge on the Ninth Circuit, I witnessed the influence appellate courts wield and the negative consequences that arise when our appellate courts do not reflect the communities whose lives they touch. I saw firsthand how the appellate bar remains an insular world, one often accessible only to those with long-standing networks and institutional advantages. Your gift today will help change that reality. As I assume the role of Board Chair at The Appellate Project, I remain committed to building an appellate system that truly represents all of us. TAP is already making real progress by empowering law students and young professionals with the mentorship, training, and community they need to thrive in appellate practice. Will you join me in advancing this effort? Your gift of $50, $100, $250, or more will deliver the coaching, connection, and opportunity that tomorrow’s appellate leaders need. Every contribution moves us closer to a judiciary that reflects the diversity and promise of our nation. When the next generation of appellate leaders truly represents all of us, our justice system will be that much stronger. Thank you for investing in this work and for helping build a more just and equitable future. With appreciation, Paul J. Watford Partner, King & Spalding Incoming Board Chair, The Appellate Project

ALSO: A group of TAP supporters has come together to match all gifts made between now and December 31st, up to $25,000. They stepped forward because they believe deeply in ensuring that talented students and early-career professionals have a pathway into appellate work. Your gift right now will have twice the impact.

Appellate tidbits

A couple case notes:

In this published opinion from the 3d, the court dismisses an appeal from a sanctions order as non-appealable (see pp. 26-29).

In this nonpub from 2/3, the court denies a motion to dismiss an appeal (arguing that the right to appeal was waived by voluntarily satisfying the judgment in full):

“[W]hen there has been a payment of the judgment by the appellant, he does not lose his right to appeal if it is compulsory, such as under execution or other coercion.” (Reitano v. Yankwich (1951) 38 Cal.2d 1, 3 (Reitano).) Payment of a judgment is presumed compulsory unless the payment was made “ ‘by way of compromise and settlement or under an agreement not to appeal or under circumstances leaving only a moot question for determination.’ [Citation.]” (Id. at p. 4; see also Retzloff v. Moulton Parkway Residents’ Assn., No. One (2017) 14 Cal.App.5th 742, 748 (Retzloff).) A respondent, as the moving party, has the burden to demonstrate that the parties entered into a compromise and settlement or an agreement not to appeal. (Coldwell Banker & Co. v. Department of Insurance (1980) 102 Cal.App.3d 381, 401.)

In the DJ, Justice Hoffstadt has Legacies: Reclaiming civility and upholding the rule of law -- The evolution of the legal profession over recent decades -- marked by gains in diversity and technology but a troubling decline in civility -- underscores the need for lawyers to recommit to the profession's noble, mentorship-driven traditions to preserve our collective legacy and strengthen the rule of law.

From what I have personally observed (which is all I can speak to firsthand), there has been a notable backsliding in civility in our profession. Filings are more commonly sprinkled with histrionic hyperbole and ad hominem attacks, and are more often accompanied by appendices attaching e-mail exchanges between counsel that positively drip with vitriol and contempt. Filings seem quicker to accuse judges of being biased, prejudiced, "on the take," or fools. And counsel during proceedings are more often confrontational, rude or disrespectful to the bench and to opposing counsel. Counsel also seem more willing to make 10 arguments in a filing instead of three, and as a consequence, to make arguments that border on the frivolous.

And note from Law.com US Lawyer Head Count Reaches All-Time High -- Currently, there are 1,374,720 lawyers in the U.S. as compared to 1,355,963 in 2024—a 1.38% increase from 2024, according to the ABA’s 2025 Profile of the Legal Profession.

"Supreme Advocacy" now online

 

“Supreme Advocacy: What It Takes to Argue at the Supreme Court” offers an unprecedented, behind-the-scenes look at what it takes to argue before the nation’s highest court.

Follow Roman Martinez of Latham & Watkins, a veteran Supreme Court advocate, as he argues on behalf of a girl with a disability who claims that her education rights were denied.

Featuring insights from former Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, legal journalist Nina Totenberg, and other leading voices in the legal world, Supreme Advocacy reveals the strategy and pressure that defines American law. Read more and watch the full Bloomberg Law film on YouTube.

New documentary follows 'rising star' as he takes his case to the Supreme Court

Justice Jenkins farewell video posted

Video: California Supreme Court Honors Retired Justice Martin Jenkins

The California Supreme Court concluded its oral argument session Wednesday with an emotional sendoff to colleague Justice Martin Jenkins, who retired after five years with the court and more than 35 years of judicial service.

Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero said Jenkins had worked “tirelessly to improve the administration of justice for all of our courts…as we try to grapple with the most challenging legal and practical problems facing our state.”

“Thank you for your invaluable service to the people of this state,” Chief Justice Guerrero said. “You’ve had a remarkable and distinguished career, serving at virtually every level of both our state and federal courts. At each stage, you have served with integrity and distinction.”

Jenkins, 71, was appointed by Governor Gavin Newsom in 2020 and was the first openly gay justice and the third African-American man to serve on the court.

Jenkins spent almost two years advising Governor Newsom on judicial appointments prior to filling the vacancy on the court created by Justice Ming Chin’s retirement. Before joining the Newsom administration, Jenkins served as an associate justice on the First District Court of Appeal from 2008 to 2019 and as a federal district judge at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California from 1997 to 2008. Earlier, Jenkins served as a judge on the Alameda County Superior Court (1992–1997) and on the Oakland Municipal Court (1989–1992). Jenkins’s prior experience as a practitioner included three years as a trial attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice and three years as a prosecutor with the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office.

2d District pro tem update

The following are currently sitting on assignment in the 2d District:

• Justice Peter J. Siggins (Retired) of the First District Court of Appeal will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Two until December 31, 2025.

• Judge Sanjay Kumar (Retired) of the Los Angeles County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Five until February 17, 2026.

• Judge Denise Hippach of the Santa Barbara County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Six until December 31, 2025.

RIP Jonathan Demson

The DJ has Jennifer Hansen's article: Farewell to an appellate giant who never sought the spotlight --Jonathan Demson, a quietly brilliant and fiercely dedicated solo appellate attorney who handled over 400 cases, argued four times in the California Supreme Court, and secured more than 150 reversals for defendants wrongly denied resentencing consideration, left an outsized impact on California criminal law despite never seeking recognition or publicity before his untimely death.

This past month the California appellate community lost an attorney who handled more than 400 cases in the Courts of Appeal and argued four times in the California Supreme Court, establishing precedents impacting criminal defendants across the state. At the time of his death, he was the attorney of record in more than 50 pending appellate cases in the Second District.
His name was Jonathan Demson, and you probably never heard of him. He was not a certified appellate specialist, he didn't have a website to solicit clients and he never took a private appeal. He avoided legal listservs and he was not a member of criminal defense or appellate legal associations. He worked alone and never publicized his wins, but he had an outsized impact as a sole practitioner, leaving more than 25 published opinions. Jonathan kept up on the law on his own and didn't take short cuts by relying on brief banks. He took on the most serious criminal cases and in the last six years he specialized in complex appeals in cases where courts applied retroactive changes to homicide law, earning a staggering 150 reversals for people who had been wrongly denied relief in the superior court.

PJ Gilbert's final column??? Not.

Today's DJ has PJ Gilbert's final column .... as a sitting justice. See The beginning -- In his final column as a sitting justice, Arthur Gilbert reflects on five decades of judicial service, the colleagues and staff who supported him, the whimsical notion of multiverses and cosmic chance, and the fitting title -- "The Beginning" -- signaling that his column will continue even after "RET" follows his name.

Today's DJ also has the monthly Exceptionally Appealing column, this one titled Conclusions about conclusions: How to end appellate briefs effectively without overdoing it --Effective appellate brief conclusions should be short, precise and relief-focused, balancing the functional purpose of stating the exact relief sought with the optional persuasive opportunity to leave a memorable final impression.