0
What else can I help you with?
What is the definition of defendant-cross-appellant?
The cross-appellant in a case is the person who files a cross-appeal to counter an appeal already filed by the original appellant. Usually, the original appellant would be the party which lost the case in trial court, and would be asking the Appeals court to overturn the trial court verdict. A cross-appellant is usually the party which received a verdict partially in their favor at trial, and is counter-appealing some aspect of the trial court's verdict to the Appeals court. A 'defendant-cross-appellant' is means that the party which was the defendant in the trial court, is now the cross-appellant in Appeals court.
What is Plaintiff-Appellant?
When plaintiff goes in appeal then he is called plainticf appellant.
What is meant by the term appellant?
The term 'appellant' means a person who is appealing a court decision. So if someone loses a case at a tribunal and appeals to a higher court they are said to be an appellant.
What is the person who files an appeal known as?
Appellant
What has the author Ralph Docksey written?
Ralph Docksey has written: 'The appellant's case. Ralph Docksey, gent. appellant. And Elizabeth Docksey, widow, ... respondent'
What has the author Herbert Randolph written?
Herbert Randolph has written: 'Herbert Randolph Esq; appellant. Wm. Brockman Esq; respondent. The appellant's case'
Who is an appallent?
appellant is one who appeals a court decision.
What do you call the party who appeals the decision of a court?
The party who appeals a decision is called the appellant. The opposing party or respondent in a decision who didn't appeal is called the appellee.
What has the author Charles Macarty written?
Charles Macarty has written: 'Charles Macarty, the son and executor of Charles Macarty, ... appellant. John Bayly, respondent. The appellant's case'
What appellant is mistaken means?
The person appealing has made a mistake.
Can the Judgment Fund be utilized to pay the prevailing appellant's attorney fees if the government actions were not substantially justified?
According to the Equal Access to Justice Act, the prevailing appellant's attorney fees can be paid from the Judgment Fund if the government's actions were not proven to be substantially justified. The appellant has 30 days from the court's final judgment to file the application.
Can the Judgment Fund be utilized to pay the prevailing appellant's attorney fees if the Government's actions were not substantially justified?
According to the Equal Access to Justice Act, the prevailing appellant's attorney fees can be paid from the Judgment Fund if the government's actions were not proven to be substantially justified. The appellant has 30 days from the court's final judgment to file the application.
