Appellate Court

Court having authority to review the law applied by a lower court in the same case. In most instances, the trial court first decides a lawsuit, with review of its decision then available in an appellate court. Examples of appellate courts are the U.S. Court of Appeals and U.S. Supreme Court.

The United States courts of appeals are the intermediate courts in the federal judicial system. They hear appeals from the U.S. district courts and from regulatory agencies, and their rulings are reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court. There are currently twelve general jurisdiction courts of appeals; all except that for the District of Columbia Circuit are composed of at least three states. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is a semi‐specialized court that handles all appeals in patent cases as well as appeals from civil service personnel, veterans, and those with financial claims against the federal government. All these appellate courts are composed of judges nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. There are almost 180 judgeships divided among these courts; the largest number is twenty‐eight (the Ninth Circuit on the west coast) and the smallest is six (the First Circuit—part of New England plus Puerto Rico). These courts' senior (semiretired) judges—almost one hundred of them—provide substantial assistance with caseload. Nominations to these courts have become increasingly contentious because of the crucial issues before them and because of presidents' attempts to nominate judges holding particular ideologies. Other specialized appellate courts, whose judges serve for fixed terms, include the Court of Appeals for the Armed Services (see Military Justice) and the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Judges of the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review are court of appeals judges designated for service there by the chief justice.

The courts of appeals are mandatory jurisdiction courts. A litigant may appeal a final judgment to them from a district court or regulatory agency as a matter of right; the grounds for appeals must be claimed procedural errors or errors of law. The courts of appeals have experienced steady increases in their caseload, especially since the 1980s; by the late 1990s they were disposing over fifty thousand cases a year. Most cases in the courts of appeals are decided by a panel of three judges, although on rare occasions the panel's decision may be sufficiently controversial that the entire court rehears the appeal en banc and issues a new opinion. After an appeal is filed, the case is briefed by both parties, and counsel may be allowed oral argument before the court. After taking a case under advisement, the court typically issues a disposition several months later. Starting in the 1970s, the courts of appeals began to issue non‐precedential (and initially “unpublished”) rulings in cases where application of the law was simple. Such rulings now account for four‐fifths of the federal appeals courts' dispositions. Decisional possibilities in a case include affirming or reversing in whole or in part, vacating the lower court or agency disposition, or dismissing the appeal. Judges may write the majority opinion or may write separately, concurring in the reasoning but adding some thoughts or concurring only in the result; or they may dissent, disagreeing with the majority's result or reasoning.

The courts of appeals marked their centennial in 1991. The Evarts Act of 1891, which established the basic elements of the present federal appellate system, capped almost three decades of lawyers' and legislative reformers' attempts to change the process of review by the circuit courts of appeals (see Judiciary Act of 1869). The reformers also sought to relieve the overburdened Supreme Court by channeling appeals through these newly created courts. Congress allowed the Supreme Court to decide what cases it would hear by making review in some cases dependent on the Court granting a writ of certiorari, which is a discretionary writ.

The Supreme Court's certiorari jurisdiction expanded over the last century, most notably in the Judiciary Act of 1925. The Court's mandatory jurisdiction was almost completely eliminated by legislation in 1988 (see Judicial Improvements and Access to Justice Act). As the Supreme Court's discretionary jurisdiction expanded, the courts of appeals' importance grew. The growth in the court of appeals' caseload coupled with the Supreme Court's reduction in the number of cases it decided each term meant that the courts of appeals' rulings remained final in all but roughly 1 percent of the cases heard.

The courts of appeals have also gained prominence because of the substance of their caseload. For their first twenty‐five years, these courts dealt primarily with private law appeals. Diversity cases (suits between citizens of different states), bankruptcy, patent, and admiralty cases made up most of their work. However, as federal regulation increased, first during the Progressive Era, then during the New Deal, and finally during the 1960s and 1970s, the role of the courts of appeals changed as appeals from federal administrative agencies became a larger part of their caseload. Other developments that increased these courts' policy‐making importance were the increased scope of federal prosecutions, especially those dealing with civil rights, drugs, racketeering, and political corruption, increased private litigation over various types of discrimination; and litigation concerning aliens' attempts to gain political asylum. Also adding to their importance were their post‐1954 use to oversee school desegregation and reform of state institutions such as prisons and mental hospitals, along with controversies like that over abortion.

Bibliography

• Jonathan M. Cohen, Inside Appellate Courts: The Impact of Court Organization on Judicial Decision Making in the United States Courts of Appeals (2002).
• Donald R. Songer, Reginald S. Sheehan, and Susan B. Haire, Continuity and Change on the United States Courts of Appeals (2002)

— Rayman L. Solomon; revised by Stephen L. Wasby

The U.S. Courts of Appeals are the middle level of the federal judicial system. They stand between the federal district courts at the bottom and the Supreme Court of the United States at the top.

The Courts of Appeals have no original jurisdiction; they do not hear the first trial of a case. They hear only cases on appeal from the lower courts. In turn, cases may be appealed from the Court of Appeal to the highest court, the Supreme Court.

At present, the United States and its territories are divided into 12 circuits, or geographical areas in which a court of appeals is located. There are appellate circuits numbered 1 through 11 plus the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. In addition, the Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1982 created the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which takes cases on appeal from such specialized lower courts as the Court of Claims, the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals, and the Court of Veterans Appeals. In 2000, 179 judges were authorized to serve on the Courts of Appeals. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (West Coast) has 28 judges, the largest number. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (the New England states) has only 6 judges, the least number. All appellate court judges are appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, as provided by Article 2, Section 3, of the Constitution.

The U.S. Courts of Appeals have appellate jurisdiction—they review the decisions of lower courts—over two main types of cases. The first type involves civil and criminal case appeals from the federal district courts, including the U.S. territorial courts (in U.S. territories such as Guam and Puerto Rico) and special courts such as the U.S. Tax Court. The second type involves appeals by individuals of decisions made by federal administrative agencies and independent regulatory commissions, such as the National Labor Relations Board. Most cases that come to the Courts of Appeals are of the first type.

See also Circuit Courts of Appeals; Federal judicial system

A court having jurisdiction to review decisions of a trial-level or other lower court.

An unsuccessful party in a lawsuit must file an appeal with an appellate court in order to have the decision reviewed. In the United States, appellate courts exist at both the federal and the state levels. On the federal level, decisions of the U.S. district courts, where civil and criminal matters are tried, can be appealed to the U.S. court of appeals for the circuit covering the district court. Eleven numbered federal judicial circuits have been established. Each circuit comprises a number of states that are usually, though not always, in close geographic proximity. For example, the Eighth Circuit includes Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, and North and South Dakota, and the Sixth Circuit is made up of Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. Washington, D.C., has two U.S. courts of appeals: the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals, which hears appeals arising out of decisions of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which has exclusive and nationwide jurisdiction in appeals from U.S. District Court decisions in patent, copyright, trademark, and other specialized areas.

A decision of a U.S. court of appeals may be appealed to yet another appellate court, the Supreme Court of the United States. An appeal to the Supreme Court is made by filing a petition for certiorari (a document requesting a review of court records). The Supreme Court has broad discretion in determining whether to review decisions. The Court receives thousands of petitions a year, but can only review about one hundred cases in that span of time. It most often denies certiorari and hears only cases that raise important and unsettled constitutional questions or in which the federal appellate courts have reached conflicting decisions on the same issue.

On the state level, a decision of a state trial court — usually a district or other local court— can be appealed to a state appellate court for review. In most states, a case must first be appealed to an intermediate appellate court. If it receives an unfavorable ruling at the intermediate level, the case can then be appealed to the highest appellate court in the state, usually the state supreme court. Like the Supreme Court of the United States, a state's highest court usually has the discretion to decide whether to review a decision reached by the intermediate court. Some cases decided by the highest court in a state also can be appealed to the Supreme Court, though again the U.S. Supreme Court will hear only appeals of major significance.

In both state and federal matters, in general, an appeal can be brought only after a final decision, or final judgment, in the action has been entered. A judgment is final for the purposes of an appeal when nothing more is to be decided in the action, and it concludes all rights that were subject to litigation. This rule is based in part on the desire for judicial economy: it is more efficient for all matters to be heard in one appeal than for a case to be conducted "piecemeal" (in several appeals) before it is finally resolved. However, both state and federal courts will in some instances hear an interlocutory appeal, which is an appeal of a matter that does not decide the entire case but must be addressed before the case can be decided on its merits. In other instances, whether an interlocutory appeal will be granted depends on the issue at hand. If the issue concerns whether the lawsuit should go forward at the trial level, it is more likely to be heard, since it may avoid an unnecessary trial. For example, an interlocutory appeal may be permitted from an order granting or denying an injunction even though the main issues in the case have yet to be tried.

The proceedings in the federal and state appellate courts are quite different from those that take place in a trial court. At the trial level, witnesses are called to testify and a jury is often present to hear evidence and reach a verdict. At the appellate level, the trial court record and briefs prepared by both parties are reviewed, and oral arguments may be heard; witnesses are not called and no jury is convened. The trial court record usually contains the pleadings that first initiated the case, a complete transcript of the court proceedings, materials admitted into evidence, and documents indicating the final judgment.

An appellate court differs from a trial court in another important respect: only the trial court determines the factual issues in a case. In its review, the appellate court does not try factual issues. Instead, it determines only whether there is sufficient evidence to support the findings of the trial court and whether the trial court correctly applied the law.

Both the appellant (the party appealing the lower-court ruling) and the appellee (the party against whom the appeal has been brought) file written briefs with the appellate court. The briefs — which recite the facts of the case, the arguments being raised on appeal, and the applicable law — help the court decide whether the trial court erred in its decision.

The appellate court may also hear oral arguments in the case. During oral argument, each party has ten to fifteen minutes to persuade the appellate court to rule in its favor. If numerous issues have been raised, a party may choose to use most of this time to cover the issues that are most crucial to the decision to be made. The court is free to interrupt an oral argument with questions concerning the facts of the case or the particular areas of law involved. The appellate court, at its discretion, may determine that oral argument is not necessary and may decide the case based only on the trial court record and the written briefs.

In making its decision, the appellate court may affirm the trial court, meaning that it accepts the decision of the lower court, or may reverse it, thus agreeing with the appellant's contention that the trial court's decision was erroneous. It may also modify the decision; in this instance, the court may accept part of the trial court's decision while ruling that other issues were erroneously decided.

The appellate court usually issues its decision in the form of a written opinion stating its reasons for the decision. The opinion will discuss the relevant facts, and apply the law to those facts. Appellate court opinions are usually published, thus forming a body of law, known as precedent, that attorneys and judges can consult for guidance in resolving similar legal questions.

See: Appeal; Appellate Advocacy; Courts; Federal Courts.