Effective July 1, 2025, Code Section 17.1-403(ii)(c) expanded the CAV’s authority to dispense with oral argument. Before that date, the statute directed the Supreme Court to adopt rules allowing the CAV to dispense with oral argument “if the parties agree
Over at SCOTUSblog, Stephen Wermiel has a short post about judgments and mandates, and in particular the difference between reversing and vacating a judgment. By statute, SCOTUS has the power to the power to “affirm, modify, vacate, set aside
From time to time, we appellate lawyers may find ourselves in the position of arguing from someone else’s brief. Now, to be clear: The brief itself may be effective. It may even be good. But it’s not ours. Every lawyer
In Mary Washington Healthcare v. Costello, the CAV holds that a trial court certifying an issue for interlocutory appeal does not have to explicitly make the four-part finding laid out in Code § 8.01-675.5.
Code § 8.01-675.5, you will
The Court of Appeals handed down its ruling in the latest episode in the ongoing Galiotos saga earlier this week. I can’t really improve on the summary that the panel provides in its introduction:
These five appeals arise from a
I’ve been experimenting with using ChatGPT to prep for oral argument. I always do the thinking myself first, putting together my silly lists, outlines, and tough questions. But then I’ve been using AI to backstop or refine my work. It’s
Obviously, the answer is going to vary by case.But as a default, I’ve settled on four minutes. Here’s why:
Every appellate CLE stresses the importance of reviewing the record as soon as possible, particularly if you are the appellant. This is especially important in state court because (1) you run up against deadlines quickly once the record lands in
I was reading through CA4’s recent opinion in Le Doux v. Western Express, Inc., ___ F.4th ___ (4th Cir. 2025), when I came across this footnote:
Western Express and Worthy contend that we review the decision for plain error because
Sometimes I worry that AI is going to replace lawyers. And then the universe hands me an opinion like Llewellyn v. Fechtel, showing that nothing that able to pass the Turing test could ever do our jobs.
Llewellyn is
