An Overview of the Appeals Process

In both state and federal courts, an appeal is a legal process where a higher court reviews the decision of a lower court. This usually happens when a party involved in the case believes the lower court made a mistake in interpreting or applying the law. The party who files the appeal is known as the appellant, while the other party is the appellee.

The Appeals Process in State Courts

Initiating an Appeal

In state courts, the appeals process begins when the appellant files a notice of appeal. This notice must be filed within a specified time after the lower court’s decision, usually within 30 days.

Briefs and Oral Arguments

Next, both parties prepare briefs. The appellant’s brief argues why the lower court erred, while the appellee’s brief defends the lower court’s decision. After the briefs are filed, the appellate court may hold oral arguments where lawyers from both sides present their cases to the judges.

Decision of the Appellate Court

The appellate court judges then review the case and make their decision. They can affirm the lower court’s decision, reverse it, or remand the case back to the lower court. The decision of the appellate court is written in an opinion, explaining the court’s reasoning and creating a precedent for future similar cases.

The Appeals Process in Federal Courts

The appeals process in federal courts is similar to state courts. An aggrieved party files a notice of appeal, briefs are prepared and submitted, and oral arguments may be held. However, there are more levels of appellate courts in the federal system. If a party is not satisfied with a decision of a U.S. District Court, they can appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals. If still unsatisfied, they can request the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. However, the Supreme Court hears a very limited number of cases each year.

Moving from State Courts to Federal Courts

While most appeals move up through the levels of the same court system—state or federal—there are situations where a case can move from state court to federal court. This typically happens through two processes: removal and certification.

Removal to Federal Court

“Removal” is a procedure that allows a defendant in a state court to move the case to a federal court. This can happen if the case involves federal law or if the parties are from different states and the amount in dispute is above a certain threshold. However, the defendant must request removal at the beginning of the case, usually soon after being served with the state court complaint.

Certification to the U.S. Supreme Court

Certification, on the other hand, is a process where state supreme courts can ask the U.S. Supreme Court to instruct them on points of federal law. This is done when a case involves a question of federal law that is not clear and the state supreme court needs guidance. The U.S. Supreme Court has discretion on whether to provide instruction.

It’s important to note that these procedures ensure that state and federal courts can maintain a balance of powers, each respecting the other’s jurisdiction while ensuring that the most appropriate court hears cases.

This transition from state courts to federal courts ensures the fair administration of justice, particularly when federal laws or constitutional issues are involved. These processes help maintain the integrity of our judicial system and provide a safety net to ensure that each case is heard in the right court.

The ‘Substantial Federal Question’ Doctrine

A substantial federal question is a concept that plays a crucial role in determining whether a federal court has jurisdiction to hear a case. When a case raises a substantial federal question, it means the case involves an important issue of federal law.

Meaning of Substantial Federal Question

A substantial federal question typically arises when a party’s claim is based on the U.S. Constitution, federal laws, or treaties. The question must be substantial, meaning it is significant or important and not merely a trivial aspect of the case. The federal question must also be part of the plaintiff’s original claim, not a defense or counterclaim.

Role in Jurisdiction

The ‘substantial federal question’ doctrine is pivotal in federal jurisdiction. Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction—they can only hear cases authorized by the U.S. Constitution and federal statutes. One key authorization is the federal question jurisdiction, allowing federal courts to hear cases that involve substantial questions of federal law.

Implications of a Substantial Federal Question

When a case involves a substantial federal question, it can be heard in federal court. This allows the case to be decided by judges who have a deep understanding of federal law. This doctrine also helps to ensure consistency in the application and interpretation of federal laws across different states.

It’s important to remember that the presence of a substantial federal question is not the only basis for a case to be heard in federal court. Other factors, like diversity jurisdiction, could also allow a case to be heard at the federal level. Nevertheless, the ‘substantial federal question’ doctrine plays a vital role in the functioning of our federal court system.

Summary

The appeals process in both state and federal courts plays a pivotal role in upholding justice and ensuring the accurate application of the law. This process commences when an appellant files a notice of appeal and continues with the submission of briefs by both parties. Oral arguments might also take place, providing each side with an opportunity to present their arguments to the judges. The appellate court then reaches a decision—either affirming, reversing, or remanding the lower court’s decision. This decision is delivered in an opinion that forms part of case law.

In specific situations, a case can move from state court to federal court via removal or certification. Removal enables a defendant to transfer a case to a federal court when it involves federal law or interstate disputes exceeding a certain amount. On the other hand, certification allows state supreme courts to request guidance from the U.S. Supreme Court on points of federal law that are unclear.

These procedures and processes, in both state and federal courts, are integral to the fair and proper administration of justice. They help balance the power between state and federal courts while ensuring each case is heard in the most suitable court. Consequently, these processes contribute to the effectiveness and integrity of our judicial system.

Learn More

On Other Sites

• Tyler, A. L. (2009). Setting the Supreme Court’s Agenda: Is There a Place for Certification. Geo. Wash. L. Rev., 78, 1310.

 

Modification History

File Created:  08/07/2018

Last Modified:  07/10/2023

[ Back | Content | Next]

This work is licensed under an Open Educational Resource-Quality Master Source (OER-QMS) License.