Law.com articles

Law.com has Trump Considers Unprecedented Move: Going to Supreme Court Arguments -- "Since the Supreme Court was established more than 230 years ago ... no president has taken time away from their White House duties to sit for a regular argument session of the court."

There is no precedent for a sitting president attending arguments at the U.S. Supreme Court, in his or any other case, according to the Supreme Court Historical Society. Some have criticized the plan as an affront to judicial independence.

US Senate Confirms Trump's Fourth Appellate Court Judge Pick of Second Term -- The U.S. Senate voted 52-46 along party lines to confirm Rebecca Taibleson as a judge on the US. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Taibleson is a former Kirkland & Ellis associate and law clerk to two U.S. Supreme Court justices.
 

Developing Appellate Themes To Attain Resonance and Relief -- "While themes in art may stimulate, enlighten, and inspire us, in an appellate brief they also have a lofty and meaningful purpose—to help convince judges to grant relief and do justice."

$25K appellate sanctions awarded & more

2/1 awards appellate sanctions here for a frivolous appeal. 

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was in SoCal last week, speaking at Cal State Dominguez Hills; Law 360 has Highest Bench Doesn't Mean Your Kids Listen, Jackson Jokes

Law360 also has 5th Circ. Judge Oldham Repudiates 'Holy Rule' For Precedents

Under the rule of orderliness, Fifth Circuit panels don't depart from prior panel rulings unless there's a controlling change in the law, such as a statutory amendment, a Supreme Court decision or a decision by the full Fifth Circuit. But Judge Oldham on Wednesday depicted that deference as misguided, forcing judges to adopt aberrational decisions and essentially double down on mistakes.

Beds' latest is Only in Los Angeles

"A History of Vacatur"

Prof. Ben Johnson of the University of University of Florida Levin College of Law frequently write appellate-related law review articles. His newest is A History of Vacatur in the Yale Law Journal:

Vacatur, a seemingly routine appellate tool, has evolved into one of the Supreme Court's most potent instruments for declaring law. This article offers the first comprehensive historical account of vacatur, tracing its roots from English and early American practice through its twentieth-century transformations to its contemporary uses. Historically, courts used vacatur to manage dockets, correct procedural irregularities, or enforce reversals on the merits. Modern usage has departed markedly from these roots. The Court now frequently employs vacatur to declare binding legal rules without issuing judgments, effectively circumventing traditional limits on judicial power. Taking seriously the Court's own insistence on history as a guide to judicial authority, this article illuminates the growing tension between the Court's practice and its constitutional and statutory limits.

Fixing the trap?

Today's DJ has appellate specialist David J. Ozeran's article Appeal deadline rules are a trap -- it's time to fix them -- Whether it's titling a notice correctly or complying with strict timing rules, California's appeal deadlines demand precision. He concludes and proposes:

There is no justification for this complex set of rules where a much simpler rule would work. Why not simply apply the outside deadline of 180 days after entry of judgment to all appeals? That way there will be no disputes regarding whether a notice of entry of judgment was actually served, or whether it met the standards for triggering the deadline, or whether an extension based on the filing of a post-trial motion applies. There is no reason why the deadline for filing a notice of appeal should be based on, for example, how a notice of entry of judgment is titled or when a notice of order denying a new trial motion was served rather than on the actual date judgment was entered.

...

The rules regarding the appeal deadline create a trap for the unwary. Replacing the current framework with an easily understood, one-size-fits-all deadline will reduce or virtually eliminate attorney error resulting in late-filed appeals. A less complicated, easily understood and easily applied rule should be adopted requiring a notice of appeal to be filed within 180 days after entry of judgment or appealable order.

Concerns that replacing the current framework with a single 180-deadline will result in delay are unwarranted, as appellants usually want to proceed expeditiously rather than delay unnecessarily. However, if a 180-day deadline is considered to be too long, then a shorter deadline can be enacted. However, a single, easily applied deadline based on the date judgment is entered should replace the current labyrinth of rules that determines the deadline for filing a notice of appeal.

"Understanding Japanese Internment"

The California Judges Association presents Understanding the Japanese Internment, featuring 3 superior court judges and 2/3's Justice Mark Hanasono on Nov. 5 at 4:30 (1.5 hours of Elimination of Bias MCLE/JBEC credit). Register here.

Vexatious litigants on appeal

Q: Can the Court of Appeal sua sponte declare a vexatious litigant?
A: You betcha. See yesterday's Kouvabina v. Veltman:

• "Kouvabina contends appeals do not constitute “litigation” within the meaning of section 391.  California courts have consistently held to the contrary."
• "Kouvabina next argues her appeals do not constitute “litigation” within the meaning of section 391 because they “arose from [her] efforts to defend herself against Veltman’s affirmative claims.”  For various reasons, we disagree." 
• "To the extent she implies the vexatious litigant statutes do not apply — or apply differently — to dissolution matters, we disagree.  The Legislature could have exempted family law matters — as it exempted small claims actions in section 391(b)(1) — but it did not.  To the contrary, Family Code section 210 explicitly provides that the vexatious litigant statutes apply to family law proceedings."

See Prof. Martin's take here. And the MetNews article Commission on Judicial Performance Attorney Is Declared ‘Vexatious Litigant’, which includes comments from Ms. Kouvabina.

9th Cir. Operations Order

ORDER OF THE CHIEF JUDGE REGARDING THE OPERATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS IN THE ABSENCE OF AN APPROPRIATION OR CONTINUING RESOLUTION

Before: Chief Judge Mary Murguia

An appropriation or continuing resolution funding the operations of the United States Courts not having been enacted into law by midnight October 1, 2025, this Order shall take effect until superseded by such appropriation or continuing resolution.

The Court of Appeals has a constitutional duty to continue to hear and resolve cases, even during a lapse in government appropriations. To perform that duty, which includes the performance of functions necessary and essential to the continued resolution of cases, judges rely on their chambers staff, as well as the officers and employees of the Court.

On September 30, 2025, I issued an order, consistent with national policy, directing all staff, officers and employees of the Court of Appeals, the Office of the Circuit Executive, and the Ninth Circuit Libraries to report to work during their normally scheduled hours, if appropriations for the current fiscal year were not continued or funded prior to the expiration of any carryover funding or continuing resolution.

The Judiciary has maintained funding since then using available fees and carryforward balances. These funds are projected to be exhausted on or before midnight, October 17, 2025.  Accordingly, in keeping with the requirements of the AntiDeficiency Act, my Order of September 30, 2025, concerning the continuity of court operations during a period of lapse of appropriations, is modified for Phase 2 operations as follows:

1. In fulfillment of the Court’s constitutional duty to hear and resolve cases, I will continue to evaluate the court’s day-to-day needs and make furlough determinations as warranted.

2. Oral arguments will go on as scheduled, and the court will continue to schedule cases ready for argument. 

3. Government attorneys, while expected to appear as scheduled, may continue to request to appear by video.  Non-Government attorneys impacted by shutdown related air traffic issues may also move for video appearances.

4. Motions, Screening and COA panels will continue as scheduled, as will Mediation Conferences.

5. Absent an order in a specific case from an individual panel, all nonjurisdictional, non-argument deadlines for all federally funded attorneys continue to be stayed and will be reset upon conclusion of the shutdown.

6. No new financial obligations should be incurred without permission of the Chief Judge or delegated Unit Executives.

7. All court units should review current financial obligations to ensure that they are necessary for the continued resolution of cases and controversies and proceed to deobligate unnecessary commitments where permitted.

8. Performance under fully- funded contracts should continue and performance under incrementally funded contracts that were awarded prior to the lapse in appropriations should continue until a new obligation of funds is required.

9. No new personnel should be hired.

10. The United States Marshal Service, the Federal Protective Service and the General Services Administration are requested to maintain all functions necessary for the continued security, protection and safe use of all United States Courthouses used by the Court of Appeals, as well as in any other setting where the Court is in session.

Tension, tone, perception problems

After Justices Scold Judges, Some Worry About Public Perception of Lower Courts-- Over the past few months, there has been simmering tension and a shift in tone between the high court and lower courts sparked by the Supreme Court’s emergency-docket decisions

Shutdown update: limited operations

A government-wide shutdown began Oct. 1. The Judiciary was able to continue paid operations through Oct. 17, with limited additional work performed over the weekend of Oct. 18-19, using court fee balances and other funds not dependent on a new appropriation.

Judiciary Funding Runs Out; Only Limited Operations to Continue
Published on October 17, 2025

The judicial branch announced that beginning on Monday, Oct. 20, it will no longer have funding to sustain full, paid operations. Until the ongoing lapse in government funding is resolved, federal courts will maintain limited operations necessary to perform the Judiciary’s constitutional functions.

Federal judges will continue to serve, in accordance with the Constitution, but court staff may only perform certain excepted activities permitted under the Anti-Deficiency Act.

Examples of excepted work include activities necessary to perform constitutional functions under Article III, activities necessary for the safety of human life and protection of property, and activities otherwise authorized by federal law. Excepted work will be performed without pay during the funding lapse. Staff members not performing excepted work will be placed on furlough.

Each appellate, district, and bankruptcy court will make operational decisions regarding how its cases and probation and pretrial supervision will be conducted during the funding lapse. Each court and federal defender’s office will determine the staffing resources necessary to support such work.

Anyone with Judiciary business should direct questions to the appropriate clerk of court’s office, probation and pretrial supervision office, or federal defender organization, or consult their websites. Find contact information and websites for federal court units.

Other shutdown information: The Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) system will remain in operation for electronic filing of documents. Case information will be available on PACER.
Individual courts will determine which cases will continue on schedule, and which may be delayed.
The jury program is funded by money not affected by the appropriations lapse and will continue to operate. Jurors should follow instructions from courts and report to courthouses as directed.
The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, which maintains this website on behalf of the Judiciary, will not have staffing to answer the AO’s public telephone number. View contact information for the Administrative Office during the funding lapse.

Bloomberg Law has US Courts Face First Furloughs Under Shutdown in 30 Years -- Federal courts across the US are preparing to furlough some staffers and curb operations as the judiciary prepares to run out of funding amid an ongoing government shutdown.

The Supreme Court expects to run out of funding on Saturday and will need to “make changes in its operations” to comply with federal shutdown rules, spokesperson Patricia McCabe said in a statement. The Supreme Court building will be closed to the public, though it will remain open for official business, and the high court will continue to hear and decide cases, according to McCabe.

3d Dist. pro tem update

In the 3d District, Associate Justice Rebecca A. Wiseman, retired, will be sitting in pro tempore beginning July 15, 2023, through December 18, 2025.

CJA hearing in SF for 3 COA appointments

The Commission on Judicial Appointments will hold public in-person hearings in San Francisco on Nov. 17 starting at 9 a.m. to consider three appointments by Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The commission will consider the following appointments:

• 9 a.m.: Matthew Scherb, as associate justice of the Second Appellate District, Division Eight (Los Angeles)
• 10 a.m.: Judge Corey Lee, as associate justice of the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division Two (Riverside)
• 11 a.m.: Judge Arlan L. Harrell, as associate justice of the Fifth Appellate District (Fresno)

The hearing webcast will be streamed live on the California Courts Newsroom.

Testimony and Comment
Requests to testify or written comments on the appointment must be received by the commission no later than 5 p.m. on Nov. 10 (five court days prior to hearing). Anyone wishing to testify before the commission must state that request in writing and include a summary of the facts on which any testimony or opinion will be based. Submissions via email to coja@jud.ca.gov are strongly encouraged. Hard copies are not required.

And now available: The CLA Litigation Section's October 2025 Litigation Update

California Supreme Court to Honor Late Justice Joseph R. Grodin -- The California Supreme Court will honor the legacy of former Justice Joseph R. Grodin at the start of its oral argument session on November 4.

For a tale about a late appeal, see this unpub D084830.PDF

On the federal side, see Ninth Circuit Rules that Decision Reimposing the Automatic Stay is Immediately Appealable -- In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled that a bankruptcy court’s decision to lift the automatic stay of pending litigation imposed by the Bankruptcy Code is a final, appealable order. But what if a bankruptcy court lifts the stay and later reimposes it? Is the latter order also immediately appealable, or is it considered interlocutory?

Attorney job in 4/1

Division One, San Diego is Recruiting for an Appellate Court Attorney (Level D-Senior) -- Division One in San Diego is accepting applications for an Appellate Court Attorney (Level D – Senior). The job can be found here. The posting is open until October 30, 2025.

CSBA--Court Surety Bond Agency has posted Appeal Bonds in a World of Nuclear Verdicts and Higher Interest Rates

Bloomberg Law has Judiciary Panel Debates Easing Bar Admissions at Appeals Courts

Federal judges warned that a proposal to streamline bar admissions rules across the appeals courts could make it harder to discipline attorneys, though lawyers raised concerns that some circuit requirements can burden nonprofits and firms.

The debate over the proposal came during a Wednesday meeting in Washington of the Judicial Conference’s advisory committee on appellate rules, which considers potential changes to rules governing the federal appeals courts.

It stemmed from a request by the National Women’s Law Center, a nonprofit that advocates for gender equality, for the committee to consider making bar admissions rules more uniform across the circuits. Disparate rules have left the nonprofit “scrambling” to call clerk’s offices to clarify procedures to list attorneys on amicus briefs, according to the nonprofit’s proposal.

Minute Orders & splitting the Ninth

Law360 has:

Justices Won't Decide If 'Minute Entry' Triggers Appeal Clock - Law360 -- "The U.S. Supreme Court said Tuesday it won't review the Second Circuit's finding that a Connecticut federal judge's oral ruling and follow-up minute entry were formal orders that triggered a 30-day countdown to appeal losses in a sales representation contract dispute worth $1.7 million. BI-QEM Inc. ... asked the high court to resolve what they said was a split between the Second and Ninth circuits over whether an unsigned docket item labeled a "minute entry" is an appealable order."

And

Has The 9th Circ.'s Rightward Shift Ended Bids To Split It? - Law360 --Now, with the court nearly evenly divided among Democratic and Republican appointees — thanks to the 10 Trump nominees confirmed during his first administration — interest in carving up the circuit appears to have died down.

5th District pro tem update

The following are currently sitting on assignment in the 5th District:

• Judge Gregory T. Fain of the Fresno County Superior Court will be sitting pro tempore until November 30, 2025. 

• Judge Wayne Ellison (retired from Fresno County Superior Court) will be sitting pro tempore until October 31, 2025. 

• Judge Amy K. Guerra of the Fresno County Superior Court will be sitting pro tempore until December 14, 2025. 

LASC App Div 2026 Hearing Dates

Appellate Division 2026 Oral Argument Hearing Dates

The Appellate Division of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County has announced its 2026 oral argument hearing schedule. Hearings will generally be set at 9 a.m. for infraction and misdemeanor cases and at 1:30 p.m. for limited civil cases in the Appellate Division Courtroom Room 615 at the Stanley Mosk Courthouse, 111 N. Hill St., Los Angeles, on the following dates, subject to further order of this court:          

• 
  January 8 and 22
• February 5 and 19
• March 5 and 19
• April 2 and 16
• May 7 and 21
• June 4 and 18
• July 2 and 16
• August 6 and 20
• September 3 and 17 
• October 1 and 15
• November 5 and 19
• December 3 and 17

Remote appearances before the Appellate Division will be conducted via LACourtConnect. Participants can access the platform through the LACC welcome page. For more information on the Court’s current programs and services, follow the Court on X (@LASuperiorCourt), Instagram (@LASuperiorCourt), Threads (@LASuperiorCourt) or visit the Court’s website, www.LACourt.ca.gov. 

2d District pro tem update

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 until October 31, 2025

• Justice Peter J. Siggins (Retired) of the First District Court of Appeal will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Two from October 8, 2025, until December 31, 2025

• Judge Craig B. Van Rooyen of the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Four until November 24, 2025

• Judge Sunjay Kumar (Retired) of the Los Angeles County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Five until December 16, 2025

• Justice Laurence D. Rubin (Retired) of the Second District Court of Appeal will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Eight until October 31, 2025

• Judge Jessica Uzcategui of the Los Angeles County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Eight until November 14, 2025

Political rift at the 9th Circuit?

Law360 has 9th Circ. Flouting 'Imperial Judiciary' Warning, Judges Assert

A large contingent of Ninth Circuit judges accused colleagues Friday of ignoring recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions limiting legal remedies in politically charged disputes, adding fresh fuel to a heated debate over the judiciary's handling of suits against the Trump administration.

Nine of the appeals court's judges signed on to Friday's accusation, which pervaded a 20-page dissent in litigation involving the attempted termination of federal funding for immigration counsel. The dissent criticized a legal challenge to that termination, and it portrayed a majority's contrary view as emblematic of broader judicial overreach in lawsuits against White House policies.

The DJ has 9th Circuit keeps legal aid funding for unaccompanied migrant children -- A divided 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused to revisit a lower court order keeping federal funding flowing to lawyers who represent unaccompanied migrant children. The decision preserves a program the Trump administration tried to cut off, with sharp disagreement among the judges over whether the case involves protecting vulnerable minors or judicial overreach into executive spending.

Bloomberg Law has Reagan Judges Are Unrestrained Critics of Trump’s Legal Moves, referencing judges from various districts and circuits.

Distinguished Service Award for PJ Gilbert

Judicial Council Announces 2025 Distinguished Service Award Recipients

The Judicial Council of California today announced three recipients of its 2025 Distinguished Service Award, which recognizes people and organizations for their extraordinary leadership and contributions to the administration of justice in California. This year’s recipients are Presiding Justice Arthur Gilbert, Judge Jonathan Conklin, and Court Executive Officer Rebecca Fleming.



Presiding Justice Arthur Gilbert
Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Six (Ventura)

Throughout his 50 years on the bench, Presiding Justice Arthur Gilbert has sought to improve the statewide administration of justice. He has served on many Judicial Council committees, including the Court Interpreters Advisory Panel, Advisory Committee on Legal Forms, and the Center for Judicial Education and Research Governing Committee.

Having a passion for judicial education and raising the public’s awareness of the courts, Presiding Justice Gilbert has served as faculty for many judicial education programs, lectured frequently at State Bar events, and participated in moot court sessions at law schools. His long-time monthly Daily Journal column “Under Submission” also serves to spread his knowledge of the courts and the rule of law to fellow judges and attorneys. In addition, his “Gilbert Submits” blog features popular legal commentary from his Daily Journal columns—more than 300 pieces spanning two decades, compiled into two books.

Presiding Justice Gilbert began his judicial service at the Los Angeles Municipal Court in 1975, was appointed to the Court of Appeal by former Governor Jerry Brown in 1982, and became presiding justice of his division in 1999. He has served on several Governors' judicial selection committees to help recruit and evaluate qualified applicants for judicial appointment, helping to diversify the applicant pool to communities that have been underrepresented.

Myron on Moots

The last two DJ columns by Myron Moskvitz has focused on moot courts (Sep. 22, 2025 -- Setting up a moot court: Common pitfalls and how to avoid them - Moot courts can sharpen appellate skills, but only when designed to measure persuasion rather than polish & Oct. 13, 2025 -- How to set up a useful moot court: Part 2 - Traditional moot courts, whether for students or practicing lawyers, often fall short of preparing attorneys to win real appeals, but a more candid, private, and strategically timed approach can turn them into powerful tools for success.)

• An effective oral argument is not one that looks good, but one that changes the judges' minds -- from "leaning against you" to "leaning towards you." Very difficult to accomplish, but occasionally it happens.
• do the moot court in private
• "Assume that you have drafted an opinion against the attorney we're helping. Grill the attorney on the reasons you did so. During the feedback session, be prepared to advise the attorney on how she might overcome your reasons."
• try to hold the moot court after [counsel has] prepared a draft of their final brief (appellant's reply brief or respondent's brief) -- but before they file it. This might require some planning to squeeze the moot court into a narrow time window. But it allows the lawyer to use the moot court feedback to improve that final brief before filing. That's when it counts most, and it might well turn a loser into a winner.

For a lesson on "plain error," see J.Graber's dissent here:

In short, in assessing whether an error is “plain,” we must consider the views of other circuits even if no binding precedent is on point. Our objective is to determine whether the issue at hand is “subject to reasonable dispute,” Puckett, 556 U.S. at 135, not to determine simply whether the issue is controlled by binding precedent. And, as the cases above illustrate, how other circuits have decided the issue can inform our analysis as to the existence—or not—of a reasonable dispute. ....

This approach to plain-error review also comports with how at least seven other circuits analyze the question of plain error. ....

Our old formulation of the test, as well as its variants, is thus doubly wrong: asking a question about the wrong time (at the time of trial rather than at the time of appeal) and about the wrong subject matter (the district judge’s perspicacity rather than the obviousness of the error). .... The proper inquiry is simply whether, at the time of appeal, an error is “clear” or instead is “subject to reasonable dispute.”

Cal Supreme Court seat: Let the speculation begin!

The DJ has 2028 ambitions loom over Newsom's next state Supreme Court pick -- Civil rights advocates urge a second Latino justice on the seven-member court, while others say the bench is already highly diverse. Potential nominees include appellate Justices Gonzalo C. Martinez, Jose S. Castillo, Tracie L. Brown and Lamar W. Baker.

• Gov. Gavin Newsom has nominated three justices to the California Supreme Court during his two terms in office, including Justice Martin J. Jenkins, his former judicial appointments secretary. But his selection this time will be different in one significant way.
• there are several sitting Latino judges, including many appointed by Newsom, who would be qualified candidates. One who was mentioned by several lawyers is 2nd District Court of Appeal Justice Gonzalo C. Martinez, a former deputy judicial appointments secretary who worked for Newsom before the governor appointed him to the bench in 2023.
• Another Latino candidate who won praise is 4th District Court of Appeal Justice Jose S. Castillo, who was born in Mexico, moved to the United States as a child, then joined the U.S. Marine Corps at 17, serving four years.
• Another popular candidate is 1st District Court of Appeal Justice Tracie L. Brown, a former associate with Morrison & Foerster LLP and Cooley LLP who was an assistant U.S. attorney in San Francisco for more than a decade. Brown, whose mother was born in Japan, was appointed as a San Francisco County Superior Court judge in 2013 until Gov. Jerry Brown appointed her to the 1st District five years later.
• Justice Lamar W. Baker on the 2nd District Court of Appeal, a former special assistant in the Obama White House, previously was a prosecutor in the Central District of California. Baker, who is Black, graduated from Yale Law School.

Gopher's out of the hole! Anti-SLAPP appeals not allowed...

A sad day for slapp-happy appellate lawyers? Today the Ninth Circuit issued Gopher Media v. Melone:

Overruling Batzel v. Smith, 333 F.3d 1018 (9th Cir. 2003), and dismissing an appeal for lack of jurisdiction, the en banc court held that a district court’s denial of a motion to strike under the California anti-SLAPP statute does not satisfy the requirements for an interlocutory appeal under the collateral order doctrine.

The MetNews has Anti-SLAPP Motion Denials Are Not Immediately Appealable -- En Banc Court Overrules Case Finding That Such Orders Qualify for Interlocutory Relief

Law360 has 9th Circ. Changes Stance On Appeals Of Anti-SLAPP Denials

Mongan to WilmerHale

Bloomberg Law reports Ex-California Solicitor General Joins WilmerHale’s Trial Group

Former California Solicitor General Michael Mongan is joining WilmerHale, just more than two months after he stepped down from the role he described as the “job of a lifetime.” Mongan, who will be based in the law firm’s San Francisco office starting in December, will advise clients on complex state and federal appeals, WilmerHale said in a statement Thursday. He will work closely with the firm’s crisis management and state attorneys general practice groups.

The Recorder has Former California Solicitor General Michael Mongan Joins WilmerHale

Law360 has Former California Solicitor General Joins WilmerHale In SF - Law360

J.Jenkins to retire

California Supreme Court Associate Justice Martin Jenkins to Retire
Associate Justice Martin J. Jenkins will retire from the California Supreme Court at the end of October after five years with the court and more than 35 years of judicial service.

Associate Justice Martin J. Jenkins will retire from the California Supreme Court at the end of October after five years with the court and more than 35 years of judicial service.

“I could not imagine a better capstone to my career on the bench than serving on the California Supreme Court,” said Jenkins, who was appointed by Governor Gavin Newsom in 2020 and is the first openly gay justice and the third African-American man to serve on the court. “Having been a judge at every level of the state court system and with the federal district court, I have seen firsthand how judges and justices at each stage of the judicial process faithfully apply the law in a fair and empathetic manner,” said Jenkins. “I have strived to do the same as a trial judge, at the First District Court of Appeal, and finally, at the California Supreme Court.”

Jenkins, 71, spent almost two years advising Governor Newsom on judicial appointments prior to filling the vacancy on the court created by Associate 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 a prosecutor with the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office.

“It has been an honor to work with Justice Jenkins at the court,” said Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero. “His collegiality, and the thoughtfulness and care with which he has approached his work, have provided a constant source of inspiration. I speak for all of my colleagues when I thank Justice Jenkins for his many contributions to the court, to the public, and to the law.”

The MetNews has Supreme Court Justice Martin Jenkins to Retire

Bloomberg Law has California Justice Jenkins to Retire from State’s High Court

Law360 has Calif. Supreme Court Justice Martin Jenkins To Retire - Law360

KO to JAMS

The DJ reports Former presiding justice of 4th District joins JAMS -- Kathleen O'Leary will handle appellate, business and commercial, civil rights, government, employment, insurance, personal injury and real estate disputes as an arbitrator, mediator, neutral evaluator, and court-appointed special master or referee.

• O'Leary served on the California Court of Appeal from 2000 to 2025, including 13 years as presiding justice. She heard thousands of civil and criminal matters and authored roughly 2,600 opinions, nearly 200 of them published.

CAAL welcomes two new members!

California Academy of Appellate Lawyers Announces Two New Members

The California Academy of Appellate Lawyers is pleased to announce that it admitted two new members at its September, 2025 meeting: Lisa Ells and Matthew D. Zinn.

Ms. Ells is a partner at Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld LLP.  Ms. Ells, who is a Ninth Circuit Appellate Lawyer Representative, received her B.A. cum laude from Duke University and her J.D. from Columbia Law School, as a James B. Kent Scholar and Harlan Fiske Stone Scholar.  After law school, she clerked for James R. Browning of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and David O. Carter of the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

Mr. Zinn is a Partner at Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger. Mr. Zinn received his B.A. from the University of California, Santa Cruz, his M.S. in Natural Resources and Environmental Policy from the University of Michigan School for Environment and Sustainability, and his J.D. magna cum laude from the University of Michigan Law School. After law school, he clerked for John M. Walker, Jr. of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Founded in 1972, the Academy is the nation’s oldest lawyers’ organization dedicated to appellate practice. Members are California lawyers with substantial appellate experience, who are elected to membership after rigorous scrutiny of their reputation, character, and appellate advocacy skills. Academy members are frequently counsel of record in the most complex and highest-impact cases before the California Supreme Court, California Courts of Appeal, and federal appellate courts. For further information, contact CAAL President Sean SeLegue. More information about the Academy appears on its website at www.CalAppellate.org.

Advice from Fed. Cir. judges

Law360 has Fed. Circ. Talks Judge Denzel Washington, AI Susan Sarandon -- More than half of the Federal Circuit's judges were in Boston on Tuesday conducting out-of-town oral arguments, and afterward they discussed the most concerning and most promising elements of artificial intelligence, how to write a good brief, why en banc hearings are rare and which celebrities they'd love to see on a panel.

The Federal Circuit judges each stressed the need for briefing and oral arguments to be used as a way to help them, rather than to just put everything and anything out there.

• "When you narrow the issues that are in dispute, you're infinitely more credible than the person that is arguing every single thing," Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Kimberly Moore said in the fireside chat. "It makes us want to fight for you because you're being honest."
• During the full court panel, U.S. Circuit Judge Kara Stoll suggested limiting appeals to three issues.
• U.S. Circuit Judge Todd Hughes stressed the benefit of direct briefing on judges when they're doing an incredible amount of reading each week.
• "The point of the brief is to help us and tell us what we need to know to decide the case in your client's favor," he said, adding soon after that "I want to be able to sit down and read it and understand it from page one."
• U.S. Circuit Judge Leonard Stark similarly said oral arguments are not for prepared speeches, but to answer questions.
• "It's important to understand that oral argument time is the court's time," Judge Stark said. "You want us to interrupt you. You want to have that hope for some insight into what it is about your case that's bothering us and what it is we need to be persuaded to come to your side."
• "Don't fight the questions," he continued. "Don't act as if you're bothered with us interrupting you. And try your best to be in a conversation with us that together we have a problem we're trying to solve."
• Judge Moore, in her later discussion, said attorneys need to actually answer hypotheticals, even if they don't exactly align with the facts of the case.

Bloomberg Law has Willkie Taps Ex-DOJ Appellate Lawyer Ross for DC Litigation Team; Law360 has

Willkie Adds Ex-Asst. Solicitor General As Group Head

Law360 also has Calif. Court Has Change Of Heart On Juror Challenge Question -- A California state appeals court has changed its mind on its own precedent governing when prosecutors can use a peremptory challenge to dismiss a non-white juror from a case, finding a "lack of life experience" can be good reason to dismiss a juror and affirming a man's life sentence.

And NBC national news covered an AI-assisted self-represented appellate victory; story here.

“I can’t overemphasize the usefulness of AI in my case,” White said. “I never, ever, ever, ever could have won this appeal without AI.”

6th DCA takes credit cards!

The Sixth District announces: Credit Card Payments Now Accepted

The Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District, is pleased to announce that it now accepts credit cards as a form of payment. The Court accepts Visa, MasterCard, Discover, and American Express. Debit cards with a MasterCard or Visa logo are also accepted. For additional information regarding the various payment methods accepted by the Court, please visit: https://appellate.courts.ca.gov/district-courts/6dca/rules-forms-filing/fees

Appellate tidbits

The MetNews has Court of Appeal to Hold ‘Public Meeting’ about how the 2d District "has posted a public meeting agenda containing a single item unlikely to evoke controversy: whether a research attorney is to be kept on the job for a spell after retirement. On the agenda for Oct. 14 at 11 a.m. is a “[r]esolution to approve the appointment of Jeffrey Blackie as a retired annuitant to fill a critically needed Senior Appellate Court Attorney position within the 180-day period after retirement, as authorized by Government Code sections 7522.56(f)(1) and 21224(a).”"

Yesterday's DJ had PJ Gilbert's column titled I.A. invidious alternative -- A.I. sparks both alarm and utility ... raising questions about clarity, judgment and how future lawyers will use it.

Today's DJ has the monthly installment of Exceptionally Appealing, titled Not taking it to the Max, about "the 1940 rejection of eminent scholar Max Radin by the Commission on Judicial Qualifications" marking "an unprecedented and politically charged failure to confirm a gubernatorial nominee."

See also Law.com's Willkie Hires Former Assistant Solicitor General to Lead Appellate Group -- Erica Ross, a former assistant to the U.S. solicitor general from 2017 through earlier this year, has joined Willkie Farr & Gallagher as a partner and will head up the firm’s appeals and strategic motions practice, the firm said Tuesday.

And see here, where appellate sanctions are not imposed on a pro per.

Trailblazer award to J.Bumatay

The DJ has Filipino American lawyers honor trailblazers, mark 60 years since 1965 immigration reforms -- The Filipino American Lawyers of Orange County gathered at the Irvine Marriott for their eighth annual gala on Friday, an evening that blended ceremony with reflection.

The Trailblazer Award went to Judge Patrick J. Bumatay, the first Filipino American appointed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. "The Declaration of Independence is more than a founding document--it's a statement of shared values," he told the crowd. "The promise that all are created equal, endowed with the same rights, is what allowed families like mine to build a future here." He spoke about his grandfather, who arrived in the United States in the 1920s to work as a farm laborer, and about his parents, both doctors who immigrated in the 1970s. "The American dream struck my family three times," he said. "It's not perfection we inherit-- it's possibility. And every generation has to protect it."

1st Monday is coming...

Law.com has An Unrested Supreme Court Begins Contentious New Term -- A stream of divisive Trump cases kept the justices busy during the summer recess. On Monday, the court reconvenes for the start of its October 2025 term to tackle fundamental questions about presidential power, voting rights and the First Amendment.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s October 2025 term begins Monday, with the justices set to confront key questions about presidential power, LGBTQ rights, the Voting Rights Act and more.
Over the next nine months, the nation’s nine most powerful judges will spend their days debating these questions at oral arguments, behind closed doors at their private conferences and eventually in written opinions that will become the law of the land.

More AI sanctions in CA

4/1 publishes People v. Alvarez and sanctions appellate counsel $1500 for failing to verify cases provided by AI. One citation was for a quote that does not exist in the cited case; one cited case did not exist at all; and two cases did not address issues for which they were cited.  

Joan Dempsey Klein added to Wall of Fame

The MetNews reports that the late Justice Joan Dempsey Klein (1924-2020) has been added to the Criminal Justice Wall of Fame at the Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center. See Joan Dempsey Klein: She Was a Leader, a Trailblazer, an Inspiration

SCOCA year in review

The Judicial Council has posted Year in Review: California Supreme Court -- Highlights and key statistics from the 2024–2025 court year:

• The court heard oral argument in all three of its traditional courtrooms—sitting in Sacramento for the first time since 2020—and conducted a special oral argument session in Fresno.
• The court heard oral argument in 52 cases and issued 45 written majority opinions during the September 2024–August 2025 court year
• The court received 6,003 filings, including 3,542 petitions for review, and resolved 5,844 filings, including 3,379 petitions for review.

On the federal side, see Chief Justice Names Conference Committee Chairs

And Bloomberg Law has Word-Limit Snag Means Curtain Seller Can’t Shed Patent Loss -- An appellate legal team’s violation of a word-limit rule leaves its client, a seller of hookless shower curtains, liable for patent infringement damages, the Federal Circuit ruled, even as the court wiped out liability for a fellow defendant who sold a nearly identical product.

Writing tips & Shutdown news

Law360 has James Argionis's article Junior Attys Must Beware Of 5 Common Legal Brief Mistakes -- The 5 no-nos are: Including every possible argument; Not developing a theme; Being lazy with headings and subheadings; Not catching typos; and Not understanding that less is more.

Law360 also has 7th Circ. Urges Litigants To Exercise Caution In Using AI -- A Seventh Circuit panel warned that relying blindly on generative AI when writing court papers can lead to serious mistakes. The case is U.S. v. Luciano, 7th Cir. No. 24-1251:

As a final note, we were unable to find some of the cases Luciano cited in his Rule 51(b) response. Whether these errors were the result of mistaken transcription or the use of generative AI, we encourage all litigants to carefully review their submissions before filing in this court.

See also from U.S. Courts: Judiciary Still Operating as Shutdown Starts -- Despite a federal government shutdown that began on Oct. 1, the Judiciary remains open and will continue paid operations through Friday, Oct. 17, by using court fee balances and other funds not dependent on a new appropriation.

And see the 9th Circuit's Supplemental Administrative Order

2/2's J.Ashmann-Gerst retires

2/2's Justice Ashmann-Gerst's profile has moved from the Justices page to the Former Justices page, indicating she served from 2001 to 2025. Official announcement here.

[10/3 update: The MetNews has Court of Appeal Justice Ashmann-Gerst Retires: The Court of Appeal said in a statement:

“The Second Appellate District extends its deepest gratitude to Justice Ashmann-Gerst for her decades of service to the California judiciary. Her commitment to justice, her leadership in judicial education and court technology, and her dedication to mentoring the next generation of legal professionals have left an indelible mark on California’s legal system. Her thoughtful opinions, her mastery of both criminal and civil law, and her unwavering dedication to the rule of law have earned her the respect and admiration of her colleagues, the bar, and the community.”]

Update: Retired Justice Ashmann-Gerst joins Signature Resolution.