Texas Appellate Law Blog : Texas Appellate Lawyer & Attorney : Smith Law Group, P.C. : Appeals, Sanctions, Summary Judgment : Austin, Texas

Four years ago, I first asked when appellate courts would catch up on e-filing.  Since then, the Fifth Circuit has successfully implemented an e-filing program, which has been mandatory for almost a year now.  In state appellate courts, however, the process has been painfully slow.

The Texas Supreme Court took a giant step in the right direction this week by releasing amendments to the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure that expressly allow the Supreme Court, the Court of Criminal Appeals, and the intermediate courts of appeals to "permit[] or require[] [documents] to be filed, signed, or verified by electronic means . . . ."  Amended TRAPs 9.2 and 9.3 are open to public comment through May 31, 2011 and, with any modifications, will take effect June 30, 2011.

The amending order promulgated templates for local rules governing electronic copies and electronic filings in the courts of appeals.  These templates mirror e-copy and e-filing rules the Supreme Court adopted by separate order, which take effect March 14, 2011.  The second order supersedes the Supreme Court's current e-copy practices, but retains features that have become familiar to those who routinely file documents with the Court.

The e-filing rules represent the most significant change.  Through the Texas.gov portal familiar to many trial-court practitioners, parties will be able to submit PDF documents to the Supreme Court and other registered users for filing and service.  This functionality was supposed to be wrapped up in the Texas Appeals Management and E-Filing System (TAMES) project, but the TAMES rollout dates have been pushed back repeatedly.  Apparently unwilling to wait any longer, the Supreme Court has effectively separated e-filing from TAMES.  With the local-rule templates, the Court has laid the groundwork for e-filing in other appellate courts as well.

Unlike the Fifth Circuit, the Texas Supreme Court's e-filing program is voluntary.  Like the Fifth Circuit, paper copies are still required.  The day is coming when submissions to appellate courts will be electronic only.  It's just not here yet.

Related Posts:

• When Will Appellate Courts Catch Up on E-Filing?
• Lawyers to Push CCA for E-Filing in Death Penalty Cases
• Appellate E-Filing Update
• Third Court Taking Courtesy E-Copies
• Appellate Court E-Filing Becoming a Reality
• More on Appellate E-Filing

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Early this year, I accepted an offer from Texas Lawyer to write a quarterly column on technology issues affecting the publication’s namesake audience.  The first article in this series—an update on appellate e-filing in Texas—appeared in this week’s issue. I am happy to report that Law.com picked it up as well.

I've received some nice feedback about the article since it came out.  One particular commenter, Houston’s Scott Rothenberg (who, by the way, gives great ethics CLE presentations and is one of the funniest appellate lawyers you could ever meet) pointed out to me that the Supreme Court Advisory Committee has been considering how the appellate rules should be modified in conjunction with the TAMES program’s forthcoming launch.  The SCAC’s initial rule re-draft and a proposed order directing the form of the record in civil cases are available through the links provided.

The SCAC thoroughly debated this initial proposal about a year ago (the meeting transcripts are here and here), but apparently has not come back to it since then. Though not an item on the current SCAC meeting agenda, the working re-draft provides a glimpse of the kinds of rule changes we should expect to hear more about soon.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks

Following up on this post, the Texas Supreme Court has quietly issued orders formally amending the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure and making technical corrections to the amendments.  

The amendments went into effect today.  A redline comparison of the proposed changes and the final version is available here.

The most significant change from the proposed amendments announced in March appears to be a newly restructured Rule 28, which governs accelerated appeals.  Rather than trump statutory perfection deadlines, the revision clarifies (through the comment to the 2008 changes) that any statutory deadlines will control.

Special thanks to Lisa Hobbs for bringing these orders to my attention.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Texas Supreme Court recently announced changes to several Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure and the adoption of Texas Rule of Judicial Administration 15 .  The rules highlighted below will have the broadest effect in civil cases.  My comments appear in italics.

• TRAP 9.3 reduces the number of copies of certain documents a party must file with the Supreme Court and Court of Criminal Appeals.  Great.  Now please give us e-filing.
  
  
• TRAP 9.8 allows appellate courts to use fictitious names or initials in certain family law cases to protect the privacy of minor children.  A sensible move.
  
  
• TRAP 10.1(a)(5) eliminates the certificate-of-conference requirement for motions for rehearing and motions for en banc reconsideration of panel decisions.  It's about time.  Why did it take more than 10 years after the new TRAPs were adopted to fix this quirk?
  
  
• TRAPs 28.1 and 28.2 establish a more uniform appellate timetable for accelerated appeals and add new procedures governing agreed interlocutory appeals.
  
  
• TRAP 38.1 allows parties to include optional written statements regarding oral argument in their briefs.  A lot of us were doing this anyway.
  
  
• TRAP 39  provides the grounds on which the intermediate appellate courts may determine that oral argument is unnecessary.  While well intentioned, this change is meaningless as a practical matter because the court of appeals doesn't have to give the parties a reason for denying oral argument.
  
  
• TRAP 41.3 addresses the precedent that applies in cases transferred from one court of appeals to another for docket-equalization or other purposes.  The transferee court is to apply the law of the transferor.  I always thought that the courts of appeals were to apply the law of Texas, not their own version of it.  This could get interesting if the transferee and transferor courts are split on a given issue.
  
  
• TRAP 49 governs panel rehearing and en banc reconsideration, including new provisions clarifying the procedures for seeking en banc review.
  
  
• TRAP 52 re-focuses the verification requirement in original proceedings from factual statements in the petition to a certification that the filer has reviewed the petition and concluded that factual statements are supported by record evidence.  This change should allow counsel to do the verifying, which will help speed the process of preparing and filing the petition.
  
  
• RJA 15 addresses appeals from trial courts in counties falling in more than one appellate district (Texarkana and Tyler, and Texarkana and Dallas).  When separate appeals are properly filed in more than one court of appeals and the parties cannot agree to consolidate, the trial-court clerk is to randomly select one of the appellate courts for consolidation.  This rule wouldn't be necessary if the legislature would revamp the appellate districts and eliminate the dual-jurisdiction counties. 

The Court is accepting public comments on the proposed changes through June 30, 2008.  The amendments, with any changes, will take effect September 1.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks (1)