Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I recently filed a motion for an appellate court to expedite execution of mandate in my case, the court instructed the appellee's to respond, appellees responded by ''not opposing'' the motion to expedite issuance of mandate. 

 

My question is two part question (1) How long does it take for the court to execute mandate since no rehearing, or rehearing en banc will be sought by either party (2) what could be the delay in the mandate issuing normally the mandate would issue that same day or the next day, its been a week since appellee's filed their non-opposition response 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, foolish said:

How long does it take for the court to execute mandate since no rehearing, or rehearing en banc will be sought by either party

 

Depends on the applicable state (or federal) law, the applicable court rules and how the judge(s) who consider your request feel about your request.

 

 

39 minutes ago, foolish said:

what could be the delay in the mandate issuing normally the mandate would issue that same day or the next day, its been a week since appellee's filed their non-opposition response 

 

Literally thousands of things "could be the [reason for] the delay.  What purpose would be served by guessing about this?

 

Also, doesn't this relate to a thread you started last week?  If so, why are you starting yet another thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, pg1067 said:

 

Depends on the applicable state (or federal) law, the applicable court rules and how the judge(s) who consider your request feel about your request.

 

Isn't  a motion requesting the court to expedite execution of mandate because neither party will pursue rehearing nor rehearing en banc  basically withdrawal of an appeal, what is their for a court to feel?  

 

47 minutes ago, pg1067 said:

 

Literally thousands of things "could be the [reason for] the delay.  What purpose would be served by guessing about this?

 

I don't want to and cant afford to wait the 60 days for the mandate to issue, that's why I filed the motion to expedite which non-opposition was met.  Let me ask this even though neither party will be filing petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc, can the court sua sponte reconsider or cast the case for en banc consideration?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, foolish said:

 

Isn't  a motion requesting the court to expedite execution of mandate because neither party will pursue rehearing nor rehearing en banc  basically withdrawal of an appeal, what is their for a court to feel?  

 

Is this the federal appeals court decision affirming the dismissal of your case? If so, the request to expedite the mandate is not the same thing as withdrawal of the appeal.

 

19 minutes ago, foolish said:

I don't want to and cant afford to wait the 60 days for the mandate to issue, that's why I filed the motion to expedite which non-opposition was met.  Let me ask this even though neither party will be filing petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc, can the court sua sponte reconsider or cast the case for en banc consideration?

 

Assuming this is a federal appeals court the entire court may on its own decide to consider the appeal en banc or the appellate panel may decide to reconsider it's decision. It is not very common, of course, but it can happen.

 

I don't know why it is that you cannot wait 60 days for the mandate, but for the most part your problems are not something that is going to speed up the court in getting this done. The court will act when it is ready to issue the mandate. While that may be frustrating for you, at this point there is nothing more you can do to speed it along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Tax_Counsel said:

 

Is this the federal appeals court decision affirming the dismissal of your case? If so, the request to expedite the mandate is not the same thing as withdrawal of the appeal.

 

What I meant was that the motion is basically a withdrawal of further review 

 

20 minutes ago, Tax_Counsel said:

Assuming this is a federal appeals court the entire court may on its own decide to consider the appeal en banc or the appellate panel may decide to reconsider it's decision. It is not very common, of course, but it can happen.

 

Yes this a federal court of appeals court I know its uncommon for a court panel  to sua sponte consider the appeal for rehearing or rehearing en banc

But that's a thought, I don't see any other reason except for that maybe the workload might cause the delay. Since neither party is seeks further review and the government filed a non-opposition response to expedited treatment of the mandate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, foolish said:

Isn't  a motion requesting the court to expedite execution of mandate because neither party will pursue rehearing nor rehearing en banc  basically withdrawal of an appeal, what is their for a court to feel?

 

I don't know what the last eight words of this sentence might mean.  Regardless, the court will issue the mandate in its own time.  Depending on what circuit the case is in, the judges and clerks might just be really backed up.

 

 

1 hour ago, foolish said:

can the court sua sponte reconsider or cast the case for en banc consideration?

 

I don't know what this means, but en banc consideration is almost never going to happen unless someone requests it.

 

 

9 minutes ago, foolish said:

this a federal court of appeals court

 

Is there a reason why, after over 1,000 posts here, you can't seem to get it through your head that you need to identify the jurisdiction when you post?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pg1067 said:

Is there a reason why, after over 1,000 posts here, you can't seem to get it through your head that you need to identify the jurisdiction when you post?

 

Its not that I don't appreciate your replies but I can't understand why you keep asking the same question "after 1,000 post here" and over literally  dozens of dozens of the same answers that I give you over the years,  I am pro se, and have been for over 18years I was set up to lose my case from day one, I have come along ways from where I was in the first days to now, if I jealously guarded the jurisdiction then, what makes you think i am going to be clumsy and state the jurisdiction now.  Particularly the questions I ask are general questions where the rules of court or cases laws are basically based on the same principal, I have gotten far, I just need a hint and I and do the rest of the research with what the tools I have at my disposal.  Hopefully if you decide to ask the same question in the future you remember my countless of replies you won't get a jurisdiction out of me or I'll just give you a any circuit that coincides with the circuit I am at.

 

 

 

 

      

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't want to provide relevant information, that's up to you.

 

Dozens upon dozens of folks post here every week.  You go weeks or months between posting, and if you think I'm going to remember details of your case, you're crazy.  You're also crazy if you think all the circuits are basically the same.  At a bare minimum, at least be clear that you're talking about a federal court.

 

By the way, this is the first time I can recall you affirmatively saying that you don't want to identify the court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, foolish said:

But that's a thought, I don't see any other reason except for that maybe the workload might cause the delay.

 

(Bolding added.) Exactly, the court's workload is one reason why the court may not have immediately issued the mandate. They don't drop everything else they are doing to do that for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Tax_Counsel said:

(Bolding added.) Exactly, the court's workload is one reason why the court may not have immediately issued the mandate. They don't drop everything else they are doing to do that for you.

 

Of course I don't think the court would drop everything that they are doing that' thought is the farthest from my mind.  I posted the question just to bounce off ideas from the top of my head, it seems more for self therapy than anything else, appreciate the input from those who volunteered their perspective. THANKS.    

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PayrollHRGuy said:

 

This is a legal not therapy forum.

 

Took it out of context, it was a legitimate question, I was confused in, a few answers from others than myself, basically puts the mind at ease as best as it can. Thus therapy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 9/4/2019 at 2:30 PM, Tax_Counsel said:

 

Assuming this is a federal appeals court the entire court may on its own decide to consider the appeal en banc or the appellate panel may decide to reconsider it's decision. It is not very common, of course, but it can happen. 

 

For the record, the delay can be a sua sponte action, here's a quotation;

                                                                                               Practice Notes to Rule 35 

HEARING OR REHEARING EN BANC.  The court may sua sponte order that an appeal be initially heard or be reheard en banc. The panel or a judge on the panel that is considering a case may at any time request the active judges of the court to hear or rehear the case en banc with or without further briefs or argument by counsel. 

 

Quite a few circuits have this in the practice notes, I am not saying that's what's happening in my case at all, but this practice does not slam the door shut to the possibility since it the practice notes.  Again I don't believe that's happening here.   Thanks 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, foolish said:

Quite a few circuits have this in the practice notes, I am not saying that's what's happening in my case at all, but this practice does not slam the door shut to the possibility since it the practice notes.  Again I don't believe that's happening here.   Thanks 

 

Right. As I said before, it is possible. Just not very common. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...