An Evening With the Supremes (10/28/26)

The California Supreme Court Historical Society seeks your sponsorship of “An Evening with the California Supreme Court” on October 28, 2026, at which former Associate Justice Martin Jenkins and retired Justice Arthur Gilbert will be honored. Dinner will begin at 5:30 p.m. at the California Club in Los Angeles. Current and retired justices of the California Supreme Court (as well as other judges) will be in attendance and will be seated at the sponsored tables.

The California Supreme Court Historical Society is a non-profit, public benefit corporation dedicated to recovering, preserving, and promoting California’s legal and judicial history, and particularly that of our Supreme Court. For nearly three decades, the Society has funded the oral histories of the California Supreme Court’s justices so that their legacies are preserved. This dinner will raise funds to support the Society’s ongoing oral history projects. Sponsors will be acknowledged (1) at our program and the printed program booklet, (2) on the Society’s website for six months, and (3) in our biannual publication, the Review.

2d Dist. pro tem update

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

• Judge Curtis E.A. Karnow (Retired) of the San Francisco County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Three through September 22, 2026
• Judge Vicki Ashworth (Retired) of the El Dorado County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Three through October 14, 2026
• Judge Jessica Delgado of the Santa Clara County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Three through September 30, 2026
• Judge Sanjay Kumar (Retired) of the Los Angeles County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Five through October 18, 2026

The Wall St. Journal has How Two Men Without Lawyers Got Their Cases to the Supreme Court -- A prisoner and a prayer leader broke through a system dominated by elite attorneys.

It has been five years since the justices last heard arguments in a case filed by a person who came to the court without a lawyer. Now this fall, the court will do it twice.

The DJ has Myron Moskovitz's column Working, Part 4: Setting up the structure of a brief -- Why starting to draft early, while first impressions are fresh, can help shape a strong argument outline and concise introduction that form the foundation of an appellant's opening brief.

Wiggling out of appellate bonding

Appellate Specialist Dan Barer points out today's published opinion on avoiding bonding:

In Guzman v. Superior Court (Wigle), published today, the 3d DCA affirms an order granting relief under CCP § 995.240—giving courts discretion to waive a bond provision if the court determines the principal is unable to give the bond because the principal is “indigent and unable to obtain sufficient sureties”—to a judgment debtor with $1.75 million in assets who is appealing a $20 million personal injury judgment. The appellate court rejects the argument that the term “indigent” means “extreme poverty,” and concludes that “indigent” means any person who is unable to obtain sufficient sureties, whether or not the person is destitute.  “Instead, trial courts retain discretion to evaluate each request for relief under the statute and against the traditional understanding of indigency that is tied to equal access to justice.”

4/1 seeks Clerk/XO

The Fourth District is seeking a new Clerk/Executive Officer in San Diego: Clerk/Executive Officer | District Courts of Appeal.

The Fourth Appellate District Court of Appeal, Division One, located in downtown San Diego, is accepting applications for the position of Clerk/Executive Officer for the Fourth District Court of Appeal. The position reports to the Administrative Presiding Justice.

Appellate lawyers moving around more than ever

Law.com has SCOTUS Litigator Demand Surges in Big Law, Amid Partner Shuffle in Top Firms -- At least seven law firms have announced hires within their Supreme Court and appellate practices since the beginning of 2025, and recruiters say they expect to see more moves over the coming months.

Bloomberg Law has Goodwin Supreme Court Group Chief Santos Bolts for Proskauer

Misleading ADR ad?

ARC is running a print ad and posted a webpage advertising "Appellate Services" using the following language (from the website):

ARC offers the services of experienced retired appellate justices for a wide variety of appeal-related matters. These retired justices are available to consult on trial, post-trial and appellate strategy, including the review of trial court records to evaluate the likelihood of success on appeal. Once an appeal is underway, they can review and comment on appellate briefs. And, as the matter progresses, they can participate in mock oral arguments and otherwise assist in the preparation for oral arguments. In addition, they are always available to work towards the settlement of appellate matters.

The print ad similarly says "ARC's experienced retired appellate justices provide strategic insight at every stage of an appeal ...."

The webpage and ad then features five photos to accompany this text. But only one of the featured neutrals is actually a retired justice.

FRAP 36s waning in Fed. Cir.?

Bloomberg Law has Federal Circuit Writing More After Critique of One-Word Rulings

The Federal Circuit is writing more opinions — specifically more nonprecedential opinions — several years after it faced criticism from a group of patent lawyers and academics over the frequency with which it disposed of cases using single-word judgments saying just “affirmed.”

In 2025 the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued 94 judgments under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 36, which allows for such decisions. According to a Bloomberg Law analysis, it was the first time that number dipped below 100 since 2007, and the court is on pace to post a modestly smaller total in 2026.

BK appellate jrdxn case

Today's DJ's Exceptionally Appealing column is Mulling Modifications -- A change from $X to zero dollars isn't a change in judgment?, about when an appellate modification changes the appellate judgment or not.

On another esoteric appellate point, those interested in bankruptcy appellate jurisdiction should review this Ninth Circuit opinion (and this blog post from Prof. Martin). The official summary explains: "The panel held that the court of appeals has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(1) over appeals of orders that finally dispose of discrete disputes within a larger bankruptcy case."

The NYT has How the Supreme Court Locks Away Its Own History -- After Justice Scalia died, the justices held private negotiations about locking away their papers. We may not see the ultimate record of the Roberts court for decades.

Post-trial dangers

The DJ has Rex Heinke's Avoiding two common errors on post-trial motions:

• The most common error I see in federal court is a failure to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a). Rule 50(a) requires a party to make a JMOL motion before a case is sent to the jury if the motion claims there is insufficient evidence to justify a verdict for the opposing party (previously known as a motion for a directed verdict). If this motion is not made, the party cannot make a JMOL motion under Rule 50(b) after there is a verdict and claim there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict. 

• The most common error I see in post-trial motions in California state court is the failure to ensure the trial court knows its power to rule on a motion for a JNOV or new trial expires 60 days after the clerk or a party mails the notice of entry of judgment. If the court does not rule within this time, the motion is automatically denied by operation of law.

AI sanctions = respondent's appellate fees

4/2 is understandably not happy with pro pers who filed an "opening brief was replete with fabricated legal authority." In this unpub the sanctions imposed are the respondents' appellate attorney fees (to be determined by the trial court).

Today's DJ has Noel Guth's No Reporter, No Record, No Longer, about the FVAP opinion.

Citing the California Access to Justice Commission's November 2024 issue paper, the court noted that for the year ending March 31, 2024, more than 1 million hearings and trials took place in unlimited civil, family and probate cases for which the superior courts provided no means of creating an official transcript. The Commission estimated that litigants in over 70% of proceedings in those three categories had no access to an official transcript. ... Los Angeles County Superior Court reported in its own general order that it held more than 332,000 hearings in 2023 with no verbatim record. ....

Government Code section 69957, subdivision (a), authorizes electronic recording only in limited civil, misdemeanor and infraction cases, and prohibits its use to make an official or unofficial record in any other case. The court did not strike the statute or declare it unconstitutional. It implied an exception.

Appellate sanctions!

See here for an unpub from 2/1 in which appellants' "arguments lack merit" and his attorney "repeatedly misrepresents the record," so ... $5K in sanctions payable in equal parts to the court and respondents.

Also of note, this unpub here from 2/6, which begins the Discussion section with a heading for "Duties of appellate counsel," noting that "The briefs of both parties fail to comply with the appellate rules and are of little help to the court in determining the operative facts."

Law.com has Getting Yelled at by Supreme Court Justice Scalia Made Me a Better Lawyer

Local rule can't bounce notice of appeal

The 5th District today, in this published opinion, makes clear that a local superior court that requires a notice of appeal to be paper filed does not allow the court to reject a timely notice of appeal submitted for efiling.

The MetNews story is Notice of Appeal Was Wrongly Bounced by Clerk's Office -- Justices say such an action may not be taken based on local rule alone

Writing advice and more

Law.com has Judge Bibas on Opinion Writing: Skip the '$5 Words,' Read More Fiction -- "A lot of [lawyers] have stopped reading enough good fiction and journalism, and need to unlearn the habits of using fancy Latinate legalisms. Why do we say ‘forthwith’ rather than ‘at once’? Why do we talk about the perpetrator exiting the vehicle and being apprehended, like we are cops trying to sound important?"

8 new justices

Today's DJ has Commission confirms 8 Court of Appeal justices in 4 districts -- The appointments address retirements, a death and one elevation.

The Commission on Judicial Appointments confirmed eight California Court of Appeal justices over two days, filling vacancies across four appellate districts and elevating Justice Rashida Adams to presiding justice of the 2nd District Court of Appeal, Division 3.

SCOTUS Bar article

The NYT (specifically The Docket, Adam Liptak's newsletter) has A Few Expert Lawyers Dominate Supreme Court Arguments, a New Study Finds -- Chief Justice Roberts, once such a lawyer, has said he has mixed feelings about the trend.

Chief Justice John Roberts has said that he sometimes misses the old days, when “the sole practitioner with the battered briefcase” would arrive in Washington from far away to argue a once-in-a-career case at the Supreme Court. These days, arguments are dominated by a small number of polished lawyers who specialize in Supreme Court advocacy. A new study prepared for The New York Times confirmed the change.

Closer to home, the DJ has issued its Top 40 Under 40 (2026) including the ACLU's Neil Sawhney, Manatt's Zach Howe, and H&L's Rebecca Powell.

4 new justices

The Recorder has Calif. Commission Confirms 4 State Appeals Court Justices -- Among those confirmed Thursday was David Sapp, Gov. Gavin Newsom's legal affairs secretary.

Sapp was one of four court of appeal selections endorsed unanimously by the commission on Wednesday. The governor has moved quickly in recent months to fill the remaining vacancies on California’s mid-level courts before he leaves office next year. Newsom publicly nominated eight candidates, including Sapp, on Aug. 7 and days later the Commission on Judicial Appointments scheduled confirmation hearings this week.

FRAP proposals

Proposed FRAP Amendments are here --  relating to service and electronic filing by self-represented litigants. Comments due Feb. 15, 2027.

CJA hearings (2d Dist.) 8/19&20

The Commission on Judicial Appointments will hold in-person hearings in San Francisco on August 19th and 20th to consider two appointments to the Second District Court of Appeal by Governor Gavin Newsom.

The commission will consider the following 2DCA appointment on Wednesday, August 19, 2026:

4:00 p.m.: Judge Denise Hippach, as associate justice of the Second Appellate District, Division Six (Ventura)

The commission will consider the following 2DCA appointment on Thursday, August 20, 2026:

9:30 a.m.: Justice Rashida Adams, as presiding justice of the Second Appellate District, Division Three (Los Angeles)

The End of 'Dismiss and Appeal'

In Law360, Josh Patashnik of Ashurst Perkins has Calif. Justices' Ruling Reshapes Midcase Appeal Strategy -- The California Supreme Court's unanimous July 16 decision in Maniago v. Desert Cardiology Consultants' Medical Group Inc. resolves a long-running split among intermediate appellate courts in the state and delivers a clear message to civil litigators: A voluntary dismissal cannot be used as a shortcut to appellate review of interlocutory orders.

In the DJ, Myron Moskovitz has Working, Part 3: Reviewing the reporter's transcripts -- Winning appellate arguments often hide in the reporter's transcripts, where a judge's revealing remark, a damaging concession or a witness's memorable testimony can become the brief's most persuasive line.

2d/3d Dist. pro tem update

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

• Judge Melanie P. Ochoa of the Los Angeles County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Three through August 31, 2026
• Judge Curtis E.A. Karnow (Retired) of the San Francisco County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Three through September 22,
• Judge Vicki Ashworth (Retired) of the El Dorado County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Three through October 14, 2026
• Judge Jessica Delgado of the Santa Clara County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Three through September 30, 2026
• Judge Sanjay Kumar (Retired) of the Los Angeles County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Five through October 18, 2026
• Judge Ronda J. McKaig of the Ventura County Superior Court will be sitting Pro Tem in Division Six through August 31, 2026

And in the 3d District Associate Justice Rebecca A. Wiseman, retired, will be sitting in pro tempore beginning July 15, 2023, through August 14, 2026, and to complete matters.