And the NYT has Opinion | Listen Up. Ketanji Brown Jackson Is Speaking to You. - The New York Times
And Law360 has 5 Things To Know As California Courts Decide On AI Rule - Law360
And see here for a pro per citing nonexistent cases to 4/3.
SCAN: News and resources for Southern California appellate lawyers, featuring the Second and Fourth District Courts of Appeal and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
And the NYT has Opinion | Listen Up. Ketanji Brown Jackson Is Speaking to You. - The New York Times
And Law360 has 5 Things To Know As California Courts Decide On AI Rule - Law360
And see here for a pro per citing nonexistent cases to 4/3.
Here's an unpub from 4/3 that address plagiarism in fn.4:
To say the least, the unattributed use of another attorney’s material is of concern to this court. It is a serious breach of ethics and a violation of rule 8.4 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, which provides it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to “engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or reckless or intentional misrepresentation.” (Rules Prof. Conduct, rule 8.4(c), asterisk omitted; see also Lohan v. Perez (E.D.N.Y. 2013) 924 F.Supp.2d 447, 460 [“With respect to defendant’s allegations that the majority of the Opposition was plagiarized, plaintiff and her counsel do not deny these assertions. Indeed, defendant’s submissions to the Court evidence that almost the entire text of the Opposition is taken from unidentified, unattributed sources. [Citation.] Obviously, this type of conduct is unacceptable and, in the Court’s view, is sanctionable pursuant to its inherent powers”].) Because counsel readily took responsibility for the unattributed use of Ms. Gusdorff’s language and apologized for what he described as an inadvertent error, we elect not to impose sanctions. We strongly caution counsel, however, to ensure no further acts of plagiarism infect his briefing in this or any other court.
SANTA ANA—Presiding Justice Kathleen E. O’Leary of the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Three will retire on July 31, 2025, after serving nearly 44 years as a distinguished member of the California judiciary.
The mood is somber in the halls of 601 West Santa Ana Boulevard. Justice O’Leary’s steady leadership guided the court through extraordinary challenges, such as the implementation of e-filing and the management of the COVID-19 crisis. Justice O’Leary also integrated a new generation of Justices and staff after dozens of court mainstays preceded her into retirement in the past decade. Her indefatigable excellence in deciding cases and administration will be impossible to replace.
FYI, per Misc. Order 2025-02 (July 9, 2025), Justice Motoike is designated to serve as Acting Presiding Justice starting July 31, 2025.
- Coming up today for a hearing before the Assembly Elections Committee is a proposed constitutional amendment authorizing legislation that would keep the names of appellate court justices off the ballot unless a petition has been filed, with a sufficient number of signatures, contesting the retention of a particular member of a court of appeal or the Supreme Court.
- ACA-8, authored by Assembly member Gail Pellerin, D-Santa Cruz, would add this language to Art. VI, §16:
- “The Legislature may provide by statute that the name of a judge of the Supreme Court or a court of appeal who files a declaration of candidacy shall not appear on the ballot, and instead the judge shall be deemed elected, unless a petition requesting that the judges name appear on the ballot is filed by a requisite number of registered voters qualified to vote for the office.”
On behalf of Chief Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton and the Sixth Circuit Judicial Conference Planning Committee, I am pleased to invite you to register for the 78th Judicial Conference of the Sixth Circuit to be held in Memphis, Tennessee, September 3 - 5, 2025. The Conference will be held at The Peabody Hotel and an opening reception for all conferees will take place Tuesday evening at The Peabody beginning at 5:30 PM. The full program commences Wednesday, September 3 with plenary sessions, a luncheon and breakout sessions followed by the Life Member Reception at the Old Dominick Distillery. Thursday's program includes plenary and breakout sessions, a luncheon, off-site programs, and an evening reception and banquet at The Peabody. Friday offers morning plenary sessions. You may register for the Conference here: https://6thcircuit.swoogo.com/2025/begin?ref=Registration+Site
Major Changes in the 22nd Edition:
The 22nd edition of The Bluebook, released at the end of May, 2025, is the most substantial change to legal citation in at least a decade. While previous editions always attempted to keep up with practitioner and scholar practices of using online resources, the 22nd edition makes fundamental changes to citations in this area that better align with its underlying principle as stated in the introduction to "lead the reader directly to the specific items cited."
You're not hallucinating — a tech-savvy U.S. Supreme Court advocate generated a near-facsimile of his voice, had an artificial intelligence chatbot use it to argue the same case he recently argued, and told Law360 on Tuesday that "many of its answers were as good or better than mine."
The five-stanza poem about the disability insurance case was the first of many quirky opinions. Over decades, Judge Biery has leaned heavily on puns and has quoted songs and TV shows. He's used visual aids, including an illustration of the history of the earth to drive home the relative insignificance of litigation. His orders have again and again made headlines in the legal press.And Adam Liptak has in the NYT: In Digital Era, Supreme Court Insists on Vast Piles of Paper -- The court’s rules require many litigants to submit 40 copies of their briefs, resulting in millions of pages printed each term. Critics call the process outdated and wasteful.
We have enough trouble figuring out what statutes mean and how to apply them to particular facts. I propose a new rule. If the Supreme Court depublishes a case, tell us why... all of us, the bar, litigants, and (gulp) the justices. The court rule tells us depublishing is not a criticism of the decision or any law stated in the opinion. So what gives? We live in an age of openness. If I went astray, I would like to know why. It would help me be a better justice. I can handle it... I guess. If my suggestion gains traction with our Supreme Court, I would appreciate scuttling such language as "in a remarkable lapse of judgment."
Above The Law has: Latham Loses Appellate Litigator To Biglaw Firm Actually Willing To Defend The Rule Of Law - Above the Law
Of the 62 cases the Supreme Court decided, including those not argued, eight came from the Fourth Circuit — the second highest number behind the 13 from the Fifth Circuit, according to data from Adam Feldman, author of the Legalytics newsletter on Substack. The Ninth Circuit has historically led in terms of volume, but the justices heard just seven cases from the California-based appellate court this term, dismissing three as improvidently granted and reversing four.
Votes Suggest Chief Justice Regains Control of ‘Roberts Court’
Chief Justice John Roberts was most often in the majority this term, dissenting in just two of the 58 argued cases that the US Supreme Court decided and leaving much of the writing to others.
The Funniest Moments Of The Supreme Court's Term - Law360
Over the course of 60-plus arguments, the U.S. Supreme Court's justices collectively made more than 11,000 remarks containing nearly 350,000 words, and while the dialogue was earnest for the most part, there was periodic playfulness that often seemed especially amusing or welcome in the context of serious subject matter.
Great Books on American History and the Supreme Court - The New York Times
And see 'Don't Be Dumb': Ga. Court of Appeals Sanction Gives Insight Into AI Usage Guidelines | Law.com
The Former Justices page for the 5th District now shows that Justices M. Bruce Smith and Charles S. Poochigian have retired this year.
Law360 has Trump Announces 1st And 9th Circuit Nominees
Tung and Dunlap will be Trump’s third and fourth appellate nominees since his return to the White House. His first nominee, Whitney Hermandorfer for the Sixth Circuit, advanced the Senate Judiciary Committee; and Emil Bove, his former personal attorney and current top Justice Department official, is awaiting a committee vote on his nomination to the Third Circuit.
This term's sharpest dissents often looked beyond perceived flaws in majority reasoning to raise existential concerns about the role of the justices and lament the future of the U.S. Supreme Court and the nation.
The justices accused one another of rewarding lawlessness, harming faith in the judiciary and threatening the entire project of democracy.
And see Paul Watford's The Quiet Power of Dissent: Why Judicial Diversity and Appellate Voices Matter — The Appellate Project
Feel like an appellate trip to the Windy City?
A friendly reminder that registration is nearing capacity for the 2025 Seventh Circuit Judicial Conference, which will take place from August 17 to 19 at the Swissotel Chicago. This year's program features United States Supreme Court Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, former United States Solicitors General Paul Clement and Elizabeth Prelogar, Pulitzer Prize-winning author Gilbert King, New York Times Supreme Court correspondent Adam Liptak, legal writing expert Ross Guberman, and more. Plenary sessions will focus on AI, litigating originalism, a Supreme Court and Seventh Circuit legal review, and ethics. We expect approximately 8 hours of Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin CLE credit to be available. You can register for the conference by clicking this link: https://registration.crowdcomms.com/benchbarconference25/register. Interest in the conference has exceeded our expectations, and we are nearing registration capacity.
Here’s a figure that might surprise: Justice Elena Kagan, the Supreme Court’s leading liberal, was in the majority of 70% of this term’s non-unanimous outcomes. To compare, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, stout conservatives, were each at 62%, tied with Justice Sonia Sotomayor. They were a tick above Justice Neil Gorsuch’s 61%.
That’s according to the end-of-term statistics compiled by the website SCOTUSblog.
And see: Former DOJ, Big Law Appellate Attorneys Join Anti-Trump Group Democracy Forward | Law.com & Progressive Legal Group Hires Top Appellate Lawyers (2)
And don't miss: SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY ANNOUNCES OFFICIAL LAUNCH OF NEW, COMPLETELY REDESIGNED, USERCENTRIC WEBSITE
And: San Bernardino Superior Court Unveils Redesigned Website | Superior Court of California
Those craving some appealability decisions should see a couple unpubs today, here and here.
The following judge is currently sitting on assignment with the 5th District:
• Judge Gregory T. Fain of the Fresno County Superior Court will be sitting pro tempore until September 30, 2025.
The following are currently sitting on assignment in the 2d District:
• Judge Stephen Goorvitch of the Los Angeles County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Two from July 15, 2025, until September 14, 2025
• Judge Kimberly A. Gaab of the Fresno County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Three until August 30, 2025
• Judge Kira Klatchko of the Riverside County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Three until August 4, 2025
• Judge Emily Garcia Uhrig of the Los Angeles County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Four until July 19, 2025
• Justice Laurence D. Rubin (Retired) of the Second District Court of Appeal will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Eight until August 31, 2025
Law.com has 7th Circuit Denies Bid to Transfer Case Against Ex-Judge Posner to Different Appeals Court
The Ninth Circuit seeks comments to proposed rule revisions, here: proposed-cr-revisions-public-comment-6-2025.pdf -- "These proposed minor, non-substantive revisions would clarify existing rules and align them with recent updates and court practices."
We transferred this case from the appellate division of the superior court to decide whether a tenant can appeal a judgment for possession in an unlawful detainer proceeding if the landlord has outstanding damages claims that have not been adjudicated. The answer is no. If the landlord’s complaint seeks damages, the possession-only judgment is not appealable because it does not resolve all rights of the parties.
CalMatters has California doesn’t have enough court reporters. Their unions are fighting substitutes