DOCSLIB.ORG

History of the Iowa Court of Appeals

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
History of the Iowa Court of Appeals Doyle 7.1 2/22/2012 3:16 PM HISTORY OF THE IOWA COURT OF APPEALS Hon. Rosemary Shaw Sackett* Hon. Richard H. Doyle** I. Early History ............................................................................................. 1 II. Creation of the Iowa Court of Appeals .................................................. 3 III. The Court in Controversy ...................................................................... 10 IV. The Early Five-Judge Court .................................................................. 12 V. Changes .................................................................................................... 18 VI. The Expansion of the Iowa Court of Appeals ..................................... 20 VII. Ten-Year Anniversary ............................................................................ 22 VIII. Transitions ............................................................................................... 23 IX. Six Judges to Nine ................................................................................... 28 X. Further Transitions ................................................................................. 31 XI. Current Work of the Iowa Court of Appeals ...................................... 38 In celebration of the Iowa Court of Appeals’ thirty-fifth anniversary, we look back on its history. I. EARLY HISTORY The organic law of territorial Iowa vested judicial power in “a supreme court, district courts, probate courts, and in justices of the peace.”1 There was no provision for an intermediate appellate court. The people of the territory of Iowa later ratified the constitution of 1846,2 which vested * Chief Judge, Iowa Court of Appeals; B.A., Buena Vista College, 1960; J.D., Drake University Law School, 1963; L.L.M., University of Virginia, 1990. ** Judge, Iowa Court of Appeals; B.A., Drake University, 1971; J.D., Drake University Law School, 1976. The authors thank University of Iowa College of Law student Gina Messamer for her research and editing assistance. 1. Organic Law of Iowa, § 9 (June 12, 1838), in II THE DEBATES OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION; OF THE STATE OF IOWA, ASSEMBLED AT IOWA CITY xii (1857) [hereinafter II DEBATES OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION], available at http://www.publications.iowa.gov/7313/2/The_Debates_of_the_Constitutional_ Convention_Vol%232.pdf. “This act of Congress constituted the Organic Law, i.e. the Constitution, of the Territory of Iowa.” I DOCUMENTARY MATERIAL RELATING TO THE HISTORY OF IOWA 102 n.1 (Benjamin F. Shambaugh ed., 1896) [hereinafter I HISTORY OF IOWA] (citations omitted). 2. I HISTORY OF IOWA, supra note 1, at 185. 1 Doyle 7.1 2/22/2012 3:16 PM 2 Drake Law Review [Vol. 60 judicial power in “a Supreme Court, District Courts, and such inferior courts, as the General Assembly may from time to time establish.”3 Another constitutional convention was convened in 1857, with the ostensible objective of removing an unsatisfactory anti-bank provision from the Iowa constitution of 1846.4 Delegates to the 1857 constitutional convention debated, among other issues, whether an intermediate appellate court should be created.5 Ultimately, the delegates chose not to recommend to the convention that a court of appeals be formed; however, the Iowa constitution adopted by the convention gave the Iowa general assembly the power to create additional courts “inferior to the Supreme Court.”6 This was later ratified by the people of Iowa.7 The legislature formed such an additional court in 1868.8 Designated the “General Term,” the court functioned between the district court and supreme court.9 It consisted of a district judge and two circuit judges from each district.10 But Iowa’s first intermediate appellate court was so short- lived it barely appears as more than a footnote in Iowa’s legal history—in 1870, the legislature inactivated the court.11 There is little history from the two-year life of this court, except that its decisions, noted for their brevity, were “usually embraced in one word ‘affirmed’ or ‘reversed.’”12 3. IOWA CONST. art. VI, § 1 (1846); I HISTORY OF IOWA, supra note 1, at 202–03. This constitution became the supreme law of the State of Iowa upon Iowa’s admission into the Union on December 28, 1846. See I HISTORY OF IOWA, supra note 1, at 185–86, 217. 4. See id. at 217–18. 5. I THE DEBATES OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION; OF THE STATE OF IOWA, ASSEMBLED AT IOWA CITY 430–46, 461, 467–71 (1857) [hereinafter I DEBATES OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION], available at http://www.publications .iowa.gov/7313/1/The_Debates_of_the_Constitutional_Convention_Vol%231.pdf. 6. II DEBATES OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, supra note 1, at 1019–20 (“The judicial power shall be vested in a Supreme Court, District Courts, and such other Courts, inferior to the Supreme Court, as the General Assembly may, from time to time, establish.”). 7. See IOWA CONST. art. V, § 1 (“The judicial power shall be vested in a supreme court, district court, and such other courts, inferior to the supreme court, as the general assembly may, from time to time, establish.”). 8. See 1868 Iowa Acts 116–20. 9. Id. at 116. 10. Id. 11. See 1870 Iowa Acts 40 (repealing the very act in 1868 that created the court). 12. PIONEER LAWMAKERS’ ASSOCIATION OF IOWA: FIFTEENTH BIENNIAL SESSION 54–55 (1915) (quoting Letter from Robert Sloan (Feb. 18, 1915)). In his Doyle 7.1 2/22/2012 3:16 PM 2011] History of the Iowa Court of Appeals 3 II. CREATION OF THE IOWA COURT OF APPEALS A century later, the Iowa Supreme Court faced an increasing workload and began to develop a backlog of appeals ready for submission.13 The number of cases docketed each month more than doubled between 1958 and 1969.14 Although the backlog had not yet become overwhelming, various proposals were made to avert a potential crisis.15 Five years later, despite several procedural changes,16 the backlog remarks to the Pioneer Lawmakers’ Association of Iowa on March 11, 1915, Secretary William H. Fleming noted: There was in our early years an appellate court, between the district and supreme courts, designated for want of any other appellation, the ‘General Term.’ It was composed of the district judge and the two circuit judges, with which each district was furnished. It seemed like a tribunal composed of one judge and two apprentices. Regarding that court, I have a letter from Judge Robert Sloan, probably the last survivor of the members of the short-lived tribunal. It vanished from existence in the next general assembly after the one that gave it life, its period being covered by 1868-1870. Here is Judge Sloan’s letter: . I remember the ‘General Term’ very well. In our district there were two sessions held, and then the Legislature met, and it passed away. There was not enough of it for either history or comment. The decisions were noted for their brevity, usually embraced in one word ‘affirmed’ or ‘reversed.’ Id. (quoting Letter from Robert Sloan (Feb. 18, 1915)). 13. ADMINISTRATION OF THE IOWA APPELLATE SYSTEM (1977), in THE NEW IOWA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 1977: A COMPARISON WITH HINTS FOR THE PRACTITIONER (Emil Trott, Jr. ed., 1983). 14. William C. Stuart, Iowa Supreme Court Congestion: Can We Avert a Crisis?, 55 IOWA L. REV. 594, 596 (1970) (footnote omitted). 15. See, e.g., id. at 597–612 (acknowledging an intermediate court may be required if the following suggestions did not work: increasing the number of supreme court justices, sitting in divisions, using court commissioners, creating intermediate appellate courts, reducing the kinds of appeals allowed as a matter of right, improving administrative procedures, increasing the number of law clerks, limiting length of the record, briefs and oral arguments, reducing the number and length of opinions, and using memorandum opinions and summary affirmances); see also James D. Hopkins, The Role of an Intermediate Appellate Court, 41 BROOK. L. REV. 459, 461–62 (1975) (setting forth various alternatives to relieve courts of the burden of increasing appeals). 16. Mark McCormick, Appellate Congestion in Iowa: Dimensions and Remedies, 25 DRAKE L. REV. 133, 141–43 (1975) (noting the procedural changes included the court sitting in divisions, using per curiam and memorandum opinions in more cases, adopting a screening process, and submitting more cases without oral Doyle 7.1 2/22/2012 3:16 PM 4 Drake Law Review [Vol. 60 continued to grow, and the court became unable to decide cases in a timely manner. The Iowa legislature established the Appellate Court Systems Subcommittee to study the problem.17 As an interim solution, Justice W. Ward Reynoldson suggested the creation of a commissioner system in which the court would endorse opinions written by court-attached commissioners.18 Justice Mark McCormick, also speaking on behalf of Justices David Harris and Harvey Uhlenhopp, proposed “a solution that primarily involve[d] increasing the efficiency of the court along with the legislature providing more staff for the Supreme Court.”19 Chief Justice C. Edwin Moore, who also spoke on behalf of Justices M. L. (Larry) Mason, Maurice Rawlings, Clay LeGrand, and Warren Rees, suggested “the establishment of an intermediate appellate court system.”20 argument); see William Eberline, ‘Plenty of Cases’ Awaiting Start of Appellate Panel, CEDAR RAPIDS GAZETTE, Sept. 29, 1976, at 3C (“The nine-member high court has been sitting for the last several years in two panels of five judges each to increase the number of cases that can be heard. The logjam now is such that it takes an average
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 2, State Executive Branch
    CHAPTER TWO STATE EXECUTIVE BRANCH The Council of State Governments 23 THE GOVERNORS, 1986-87 By Thad L. Beyle Considerable interest in gubernatorial elec­ Rhode lsland), and Madeleine Kunin (D.Ver. tions was expressed during 1986-87, a period mont). between presidential campaign& Fint, there Thirteen incumbent governors were constitu­ was considerable political activity in the form tionally ineligible to seek another term: Bob of campaigning as 39 governol"8hips were con­ Graham (D.Florida), George Ariyoshi (D·Ha· tested. Second, as the problema 8B8OCiated with waii), John Carlin (D.Kansas), Martha Layne the federal deficit and the ideoiogicalstance of Collins (D.Kentucky), Joseph Brennan (D­ the Reagan administration continued, gover­ Maine), Harry Hughes (D.Maryland), Thney non and other state leaders made difficult deci­ Anaya (D.New Mexico), George Nigh CD·Okla­ sions on the extent of their statal' commitment homa), Victor Atiyeh (R.Oregon), Dick Thorn· to a range ofpolicy concerns. Third was the con­ burgh (R.Pennsylvania), Richard Riley (D. tinuing role of the governorship in producing South Carolina), William Janklow (R.South serious presidential candidates aft.er a period Dakota), and Lamar Alexander (R.Thnne68e6). in which it was believed that governors could Seven incumbents opted to retire; George no longer be considered as potential candidates Wallace (D.Alabama), Bruce Babbitt CD-Arizo­ for president.) Fourth was the negative publi. na), Richard Lamm (D-Colorado), John Evans city fostered by the questionable actions of (D.Idaho). William Allain (D-Mississippi), several governors. which in one case lead to an Robert Kerry CD·Nebraska), and Ed Hershler impeachment and in two others contributed to CD ·Wyoming).
    [Show full text]
  • District of Columbia Court of Appeals
    District of Columbia Court of Appeals Nos. 11-FS-1217, 11-FS-1218, 11-FS-1255, 11-FS-1256, DEC - 8 2016 11-FS-1257, 11-FS-1258, 11-FS-1259 & 11-FS-1260 IN RE TA.L.; IN RE A.L.; IN PETITION OF R.W. & A.W.; IN RE PETITION OF E.A.; ADA-115-09; A.H. AND T.L. ADA-116-09; Appellants, NEG-235-08; ADA-172-09; ADA-173-09 On Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia BEFORE: WASHINGTON, Chief Judge; GLICKMAN, FISHER, BLACKBURNE- RIGSBY, THOMPSON, BECKWITH, EASTERLY, and MCLEESE, Associate Judges; and REID, Senior Judge. J U D G M E N T This case came to be heard on the transcript of record and the briefs filed, and was argued by counsel. On consideration whereof, and for the reasons set forth in the opinion filed this date, it is now hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed. For the Court: Dated: December 8, 2016. Opinion by Chief Judge Eric T. Washington. Associate Judge Anna Blackburne-Rigsby and Senior Judge Inez Smith Reid, joining in full; Associate Judge Phyllis D. Thompson, joining in Parts III and V (except for footnote 38) and the judgment; Associate Judges Stephen Glickman, John Fisher, and Roy McLeese, concurring in the judgment; and Associate Judges Corinne Beckwith and Catharine Easterly, joining in Parts III and IV, but dissenting from the judgment. Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press.
    [Show full text]
  • OWRB's Brief in Support of Application to Assume Original Jurisdiction
    Case No. #11037 5 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA Oklahoma Water Resources Board, Petitioner, vs. The United States on behalf of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, a federally recognized Indian Tribe; the United States on behalf of the Chickasaw Nation" et aI., Respondents. BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION TO ASSUME ORIGINAL JURISDICTION PATRICK R. WYRICK, OBA #21874 NEAL LEADER, OBA #5310 Solicitor General Senior Assistant Attorney General 313 NE 21 ST Street 313 NE 21 ST Street Oklahoma City, OK 73105 Oklahoma City, OK 73105 (405) 522-4448 (405) 522-4393 (405) 522-0669 FAX (405) 522-0669 FAX [email protected] [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Background Information 2 Relevant Facts 4 Arizona v. San Carlos Apache Tribe, 463 U.S. 545 (1983) 6 Ethics Comm'n v. Cullison, 1993 OK37, 850 P.2d 1069 8 43 U.S.C. § 666 6 82 O.S. § 105.6 7 Art. 7, Sec. 4 of the Oklahoma Constitution 8 Summary of the Argument 8 Argument and Authorities - 9 I. The Court should assume original jurisdiction because the adjudication is of critical importance to the State of Oklahoma and to the health, safety, and general welfare of its citizens 9 Keating v. Johnson, 1996 OK 61 , 918 P.2d 51 9 Sporhase v. Nebraska., 458 U.S. 941 (1982) 10 82 O.S. §§ 1-1801.4 10 Art. X, §§ 27A & 39, of the Oklahoma Constitution 10 Okla. Admin. Code §§ 785:1-1-1 10 II. The Court's exercise of original jurisdiction will allow for an expeditious final resolution of claims and issues of critical importance to the State, the Nations, and all other claimants to the water resources at issue ' 11 III.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Supreme Court of Iowa ______
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA _____________________________________________________________ STATE OF IOWA, ) ) Plaintiff-Appellee, ) ) v. ) S.CT. NO. 19-0451 ) DAVID LEE STAAKE, ) ) Defendant-Appellant. ) _____________________________________________________________ APPEAL FROM THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR FAYETTE COUNTY HONORABLE RICHARD D. STOCHL, JUDGE ____________________________________________________________ APPELLANT'S BRIEF AND ARGUMENT _____________________________________________________________ SHELLIE L. KNIPFER Assistant Appellate Defender [email protected] [email protected] STATE APPELLATE DEFENDER'S OFFICE Fourth Floor Lucas Building Des Moines, Iowa 50319 (515) 281-8841 / (515) 281-7281 FAX ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT FINAL ELECTRONICALLY FILED OCT 28, 2019 CLERK OF SUPREME COURT 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On the 28th day of October, 2019, the undersigned certifies that a true copy of the foregoing instrument was served upon Defendant-Appellant by placing one copy thereof in the United States mail, proper postage attached, addressed to David L. Staake, 123 5th Str. N.W., Olwein, IA 50662. APPELLATE DEFENDER'S OFFICE /s/ Shellie L. Knipfer SHELLIE L. KNIPFER Assistant Appellate Defender Appellate Defender Office Lucas Bldg., 4th Floor 321 E. 12th Street Des Moines, IA 50319 (515) 281-8841 [email protected] [email protected] SLK/sm/7/19 SLK/sm/10/19 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Certificate of Service ....................................................... 2 Table of Authorities
    [Show full text]
  • Harvard University
    HARVARD UNIVERSITY ROBERT AND RENÉE BELFER CENTER FOR SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 2000-2001 ANNUAL REPORT 2 Robert and Renée Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs 2000-2001 Annual Report Director’s Foreword 5 Overview From the Executive Director 7 Environment and Natural Resources Program TABLE 8 OF Harvard Information Infrastructure Project 52 CONTENTS International Security Program 71 Science, Technology and Public Policy Program 109 Strengthening Democratic Institutions Project 155 WPF Program on Intrastate Conflict, Conflict Prevention, and Conflict Resolution 177 Events 188 Publications 219 Biographies 241 Robert and Renée Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs 3 2000-2001 Annual Report 4 Robert and Renée Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs 2000-2001 Annual Report Director’s Foreword —————————————♦ For the hub of the John F. Kennedy School’s research, teaching, and training in international security affairs, environmental and resource issues, conflict prevention and resolution, and science and technology policy, the first academic year of the new century has been bracing. According to our mission statement, The Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs strives to provide leadership in advancing policy-relevant knowledge about the most important challenges of international security and other critical issues where science, technology, and international affairs intersect. BCSIA’s leadership begins with the recognition of science and technology as driving forces transforming threats and opportunities in international affairs. The Center integrates insights of social scientists, technologists, and practitioners with experience in government, diplomacy, the military, and business to address critical issues. BCSIA involvement in both the Republican and Democratic campaigns. BCSIA was privileged to have senior advisors in both camps in one of the most unforgettable American elections in recent memory.
    [Show full text]
  • Guantanamo, Boumediene, and Jurisdiction-Stripping: the Mpei Rial President Meets the Imperial Court" (2009)
    University of Minnesota Law School Scholarship Repository Constitutional Commentary 2009 Guantanamo, Boumediene, and Jurisdiction- Stripping: The mpI erial President Meets the Imperial Court Martin J. Katz Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/concomm Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Katz, Martin J., "Guantanamo, Boumediene, and Jurisdiction-Stripping: The mpeI rial President Meets the Imperial Court" (2009). Constitutional Commentary. 699. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/concomm/699 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Constitutional Commentary collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Article GUANTANAMO, BOUMEDIENE, AND JURISDICTION-STRIPPING: THE IMPERIAL PRESIDENT MEETS THE IMPERIAL COURT Martin J. Katz* INTRODUCTION In Boumediene v. Bush,1 the Supreme Court struck down a major pillar of President Bush's war on terror: the indefinite de­ tention of terror suspects in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The Court held that even non-citizen prisoners held by the United States government on foreign soil could challenge their confinement by seeking a writ of habeas corpus in federal court, and that the procedures the government had provided for such challenges were not an adequate substitute for the writ." As a habeas corpus case, Boumediene may well be revolu­ tionary.3 However, Boumediene is more than merely a habeas * Interim Dean and Associate Professor of Law. University of Denver College of Law; Yale Law School. J.D. 1991: Harvard College. A.B. 1987. Thanks to Alan Chen.
    [Show full text]
  • Robert D. Ray
    ROBERT D. RAY Few names in Iowa’s 172-year history are as instantly recognizable as Robert D. Ray. He was born in Des Moines September 26, 1928 and passed away in Des Moines on July 8, 2018. In the intervening years, Robert D. Ray’s leadership touched the lives of generations of Iowans on dozens of fronts and reached global impact on several occasions. Ray grew up in the Drake neighborhood and met the love of his life and future wife, Billie Lee Hornberger, at what is now First Christian Church while they were students at Roosevelt High School. The Roosevelt High School sweethearts started dating in 1945 and were married on December 22, 1951. His life revolved around love of family, first as a son and brother, followed by his passion to be a devoted husband, dedicated father to the Ray’s three daughters and adoring grandfather to their eight grandchildren. After World War II, Ray served the U. S. Army in Japan. He graduated from Drake University with a business degree in 1952 and law degree 1954. He was a law and reading clerk in the Iowa State Senate, where he began to understand government and relish politics. Later, he built a successful practice as a trial lawyer with two brothers named Lawyer; the firm was Lawyer, Lawyer and Ray. In 1963, Ray was elected Iowa Republican State Chairman and became a member of the Republican National Committee. After heavy losses in the 1964 Goldwater debacle, Ray resolved to rebuild and the GOP elected three new Congressmen and 88 state legislators in 1966.
    [Show full text]
  • Remarks of Senator Bob Dole Governors Tuesday
    This document is from the collections at the Dole Archives, University of Kansas REMARKS OFhttp://dolearchives.ku.edu SENATOR BOB DOLE GOVERNORS TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 1987 THANK YOU, MIKE (HAYDEN). AND THANKS TO GARREY (CARRUTHERS, HOST GOVERNOR OF NEW MEXICO) AND TO ALL OF YOU FOR INVITING ME HERE. REPUBLICANS PICKED UP EIGHT GOVERNORSHIPS IN THE LAST ELECTION. YOUR COATIAILS WEREN'T QUITE LONG ENOUGH TO KEEP OUR PARlY IN THE MAJORITY IN THE SENATE. BUT WE DID STRENGTHEN OUR BASE AT THE STATE LEVEL. AND l'M HAPPY TO Page 1 of 142 This document is from the collections at the Dole Archives, University of Kansas http://dolearchives.ku.edu . -2- NOTE THAT MOST OF YOU HAVE BEEN SElTING A WORTHY EXAMPLE FOR THE REST OF THE NATION BY RUNNING BUDGET SURPLUSES IN YOUR STATE WHILE • KEEPING TAXES LOW. ALTHOUGH IT1S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I SERVED IN A STATE LEGISLATURE, THE EXPERIENCES I GAINED THEN. AND THE LESSONS I LEARNED AS A COUNlY ATTORNEY DEALING WITH THE REAL LIFE PROBLEMS OF MY NEIGHBORS, HELPED FORM THE FOUNDATION OF MY CAREER IN PUBLIC SERVICE. ~ · '"~ .. l Page 2 of 142 This document is from the collections at the Dole Archives, University of Kansas http://dolearchives.ku.edu. -3- TH ERE IS. OF COURSE, A CONTINUING DEBATE OVER THE PROPER ROLE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN THE LIVES OF OUR NEIGHBORS. BUT IN MY VIEW, THE FRAMERS OF OUR CONSTITUTION HAD THE RIGHT IDEA-THE EVERYDAY ISSUES ARE MUCH BETTER OFF IN THE HANDS OF LOCAL AND STATE AUTHORITIES. NEVERTHELESS,l - AMERICANS-- -- -- MUST BE WONDERING ! ! TODAY WHY IT EVER ALLOWED CONGRESS TO GET ITS HANDS ON THEIR TAX DOLLARS.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Judicial Performance Review
    2016 Judicial Performance Review Prepared by The Iowa State Bar Association Table of Contents Judicial Performance Review Information....................................................................................................3 Judicial Performance Review Q&A...............................................................................................................4 Judicial Biographies.....................................................................................................................................6 Judicial Performance Review Results Iowa Supreme Court..................................................................................................................................22 Iowa Court of Appeals...............................................................................................................................23 District 1A.................................................................................................................................................24 Allamakee, Clayton, Delaware, Dubuque, Winneshiek Counties District 1B.................................................................................................................................................25 Black Hawk, Buchanan, Chickasaw, Fayette, Grundy, Howard Counties District 2A.................................................................................................................................................26 Bremer, Butler, Cerro Gordo, Floyd, Franklin, Hancock, Mitchell, Winnebago, Worth Counties
    [Show full text]
  • Amicus Brief More Than Ten Days Before Its Due Date
    No. 22O154 In the Supreme Court of the United States _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ NEW HAMPSHIRE, Plaintiff, v. MASSACHUSETTS, Defendant. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE STATES OF OHIO, ARKANSAS, INDIANA, KENTUCKY, LOUISIANA, MISSOURI, NEBRASKA, OKLAHOMA, TEXAS, AND UTAH IN SUPPORT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BILL OF COMPLAINT _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ DAVE YOST BENJAMIN M. FLOWERS* Ohio Attorney General *Counsel of Record 30 E. Broad St., 17th Ohio Solicitor General Floor MICHAEL J. HENDERSHOT Columbus, Ohio 43215 Chief Deputy Solicitor General KYSER BLAKELY Deputy Solicitor General 30 E. Broad St., 17th Floor Columbus, Ohio 43215 614-466-8980 [email protected] Counsel for Amicus Curiae State of Ohio (additional counsel listed at the end of the brief) i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ....................................... ii STATEMENT OF AMICI INTEREST ....................... 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT .................................... 1 ARGUMENT ............................................................... 5 I. This Court’s original jurisdiction in cases between States is mandatory. ......................... 5 II. This Court’s cases holding that original jurisdiction is discretionary should not be applied to disputes between
    [Show full text]
  • 1 in the Iowa Supreme Court in the Matter of Lessons Learned ) From
    In the Iowa Supreme Court In the Matter of Lessons Learned ) From the Judicial Branch Response ) April 28, 2021 To COVID-19 ) Beginning in early March 2020, the judicial branch was preparing to minimize the impact of COVID-19 on the services it provides to Iowans. In the span of just a few weeks, the planning effort transitioned into the need for immediate actions. As the pandemic worsened and more information about the virus became available, the Iowa Supreme Court issued orders to protect the public and court employees while keeping the courts as open and operational as possible. Between March 12 and November 24, nearly thirty supervisory orders were issued. As the judicial branch begins to plan for a post COVID-19 world, it seeks to review the formal orders and informal policies or practices adopted by the branch in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The supreme court establishes the Lessons Learned Task Force to make recommendations to the supreme court on rules, polices or practices that should be retained, modified or stopped. The recommendations shall be submitted to the supreme court by June 4, 2021. The following individuals are appointed to the Task Force: Honorable Susan Christensen, Chief Justice, Iowa Supreme Court, Harlan, chair Honorable Kellyann Lekar, Chief Judge, First Judicial District, Waterloo Honorable David Porter, District Judge, Des Moines Honorable Russell Keast, District Associate Judge, Cedar Rapids Steve Bradford, corporate counsel, Muscatine 1 Carrington Buze, Children’s Justice, Des Moines Guy Cook, private
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure
    TEXAS RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE Table of Contents SECTION ONE. (c) Where to File. GENERAL PROVISIONS (d) Order of the Court. Rule 1. Scope of Rules; Local Rules of Courts of Rule 5. Fees in Civil Cases Appeals Rule 6. Representation by Counsel 1.1. Scope. 6.1. Lead Counsel 1.2. Local Rules (a) For Appellant. (a) Promulgation. (b) For a Party Other Than Appellant. (b) Copies. (c) How to Designate. (c) Party's Noncompliance. 6.2. Appearance of Other Attorneys Rule 2. Suspension of Rules 6.3. To Whom Communications Sent Rule 3. Definitions; Uniform Terminology 6.4. Nonrepresentation Notice 3.1. Definitions (a) In General. (b) Appointed Counsel. 3.2. Uniform Terminology in Criminal Cases 6.5. Withdrawal (a) Contents of Motion. Rule 4. Time and Notice Provisions (b) Delivery to Party. (c) If Motion Granted. 4.1. Computing Time (d) Exception for Substitution of (a) In General. Counsel. (b) Clerk's Office Closed or Inaccessible. 6.6. Agreements of Parties or Counsel 4.2. No Notice of Trial Court’s Judgment Rule 7. Substituting Parties in Civil Case (a) Additional Time to File Documents. 7.1. Parties Who Are Not Public Officers (1) In general. (a) Death of a Party. (2) Exception for restricted appeal. (1) Civil Cases. (b) Procedure to Gain Additional Time. (2) Criminal Cases. (c) The Court’s Order. (b) Substitution for Other Reasons. 4.3. Periods Affected by Modified 7.2. Public Officers Judgment in Civil Case (a) Automatic Substitution of Officer. (a) During Plenary-Power Period. (b) Abatement. (b) After Plenary Power Expires.
    [Show full text]