Appellate 2719 Baker

THE JOURNAL OF
APPELLATE PRACTICE
AND PROCESS
ARTICLES
AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY ON FEDERAL

APPELLATE PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE*
Thomas E. Baker**
The materials in this bibliography are arranged by:

treatises; textbooks; studies and books; manuals; symposia; and
articles and annotations. The articles and annotations are
grouped topically. Works are listed alphabetically by author.
Especially important sources for studying and understanding
appellate jurisdiction are noted with an asterisk. Each entry
appears only once even if it might fit into more than one
category.
* This annotated bibliography is derived, with permission, from Thomas E. Baker, A

Primeron the Jurisdiction of the U.S. Courts ofAppeals (2d ed., Fed. Jud. Ctr. 2009), but
this version is substantially expanded and revised. The earlier version can be found at
http://www.fjc.gov/public/pdf.nsf/lookup/primjur2.pdf/$file/primjur2.pdf (accessed June
11, 2009; copy on file with Journal of Appellate Practice and Process).
** Professor of Law, Florida International University College of Law; coeditor of
Appellate Courts: Structures, Functions, Processes, and Personnel (2d ed., Lexis-Nexis
Publishing Co. 2006) (with Daniel J. Meador & Joan E. Steinman); Fellow, American
Academy of Appellate Lawyers.
The author thanks the following student research assistants: Alberto Alonso, Rigers
Gjyshi, Stephanie Novak, and Michelle White. Brooke Terpenning deserves special
appreciation for her painstaking efforts at formatting and cite checking. Thanks also go to
Jan Stone and Janet Reinke in the FlU law library, for their good-natured assistance, and
Fred Dingledy at the College of William & Mary, for his determined initiative to update
this research while the author was a visiting professor there.
THE JOURNAL OF APPELLATE PRACTICE AND PROCESS Vol. 10, No. 1 (Spring 2009)
THE JOURNAL OF APPELLATE PRACTICE AND PROCESS
I. TREATISES
* James Wm. Moore & Daniel R. Coquillette, Moore's

FederalPractice(3d ed., Matthew Bender 1997): 33 vols.; once
considered the preeminent treatise on federal jurisdiction and
procedure; volumes 19 and 20 cover appeals to the courts of
appeals, but the treatise is better for issues on district court
jurisdiction; organization and presentation of material are not up
to earlier editions; still comprehensive; a good place to begin
research.
Richard J. Pierce, Jr., Administrative Law Treatise (4th ed.,

Aspen Law & Business 2002 & Supp. 2007): 3 vols.; once
considered the preeminent treatise; primarily devoted to
administrative law, but also covers administrative procedure.
Ronald D. Rotunda & John E. Nowak, Treatise on

Constitutional Law-Substance and Procedure (3d ed., West
Group 1999): 5 vols.; an up-to-date analysis and synthesis of
constitutional law; a superior resource on the constitutional
aspects of federal jurisdiction; the popular one-volume student
hornbook is keyed to this treatise.
* Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R. Miller & Andrew D.
Leipold, FederalPractice& Procedure(4th ed., Thomson West
2008): 78 vols.; the best and most usable multi-volume treatise
on federal courts; updated continuously with supplements;
volumes 15A, 15B, 16, and 16A cover the courts of appeals;
each section amounts to a knowledgeable and thorough lecture
on the topic with comprehensive and exhaustive citations; the
sixth edition of Wright & Kane's student hombook (2002) is a
masterful highlight of this set.
II. TEXTBOOKS
* Ruggero J. Aldisert, The Judicial Process-Text,
Materials and Cases (2d ed., West Publg. Co. 1996): a
thoughtful jurist examines his craft; a mixture of jurisprudence
and procedure.
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY - FEDERAL APPEALS
Lea Brilmayer & Jacob Corre, An Introduction to

Jurisdictionin the American Federal System (Michie Co. 1986):
designed as a student guide to some of the more esoteric
questions of jurisdiction.
Robert C. Casad & William B. Richman, Jurisdiction in

Civil Actions: Territorial Basis and Process Limitations on
Jurisdiction of State and Federal Courts (3d ed., Lexis Law
Publg. 1998 & Supp. 2006): a comprehensive treatment of all
aspects of district court jurisdiction in civil actions, including
constitutional limits and rules of procedure; very thorough on
the original jurisdiction of the district courts.
* Gregory A. Castanias & Robert H. Klonoff, Federal
Appellate Practiceand Procedure in a Nutshell (Thomson West
2008): a practical overview of federal appellate procedures; a
useful student guide; a concise reference for attorneys.
Erwin Chemerinsky, Federal Jurisdiction (5th ed., Aspen

Publishers 2007): a discussion of the law and policy involved
with current jurisdictional issues; focus is more on the district
court level and federal-state issues; a comprehensive and
thorough student guide written by a masterful teacher and
prolific academic.
Robert M. Cover, Owen M. Fiss & Judith Resnik, The

Federal ProceduralSystem: A Rule and Statutory Source Book
(Foundation Press 1991): an innovative casebook that takes a
theoretical approach to understanding federal court jurisdiction;
a post-modem, meta-theory approach.
David P. Currie, FederalCourts-Casesand Materials (4th

ed., West Publg. Co. 1990): an effort at modem organization to
emphasize major contemporary themes such as civil rights
jurisdiction; note materials seek to deepen analysis; includes a
statutory appendix.
Donald L. Doemberg, C. Keith Wingate & Donald H.

Zinger, Federal Courts, Federalism and Separation of Powers
(3d ed., West Group 2004): a comprehensive and thorough
casebook with a traditional approach.
William N. Eskridge, Jr., Philip P. Frickey, Henry Melvin

Hart & Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in
the Making and Application of Law (rev. ed., Foundation Press
1994): a re-publication of a classic law school text that defined
process jurisprudence as a school of legal thought.
* Richard H. Fallon, Jr., Daniel J. Meltzer & David L.
Shapiro, Hart and Wechsler's The Federal Courts and the
Federal System (5th ed., Foundation Press 2003): more than a
casebook, an encyclopedic reference work, packed with history
and theory; an exhaustive treatment of the federal courts in a
new 1,638-page edition.
Howard P. Fink, Linda S. Mullenix & Mark V. Tushnet,

Federal Courts in the 21st Century (3d ed., LexisNexis 2007): a
blend of history and constitutional law with practice and
procedure; a casebook that describes the current state of the
federal courts and considers their future.
Arthur D. Hellman & Lauren K. Robel, Federal Courts:

Cases and Materials on JudicialFederalism and the Lawyering
Process (LexisNexis 2005): comprehensive and unified
treatment of litigation of federal issues in state courts and in
federal courts; this casebook includes cases, notes, questions and
problems.
Peter W. Low & John C. Jeffries, Jr., Federal Courts and

the Law of Federal-State Relations (5th ed., Foundation Press
2004): a modem treatment that de-emphasizes procedure and
emphasizes themes of federalism; provides extended notes;
includes a thorough bibliography of secondary authorities.
Robert J. Martineau, Kent Sinclair, Michael E. Solimine &

Randy J. Holland, Cases and Materials on Appellate Practice
and Procedure (2d ed., Thomson West 2005): a casebook on
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY- FEDERAL APPEALS
appellate practice and procedure with an emphasis on appellate

litigation.
* Daniel J. Meador, Thomas E. Baker & Joan E. Steinman,
Appellate Courts: Structures, Functions, Processes, and
Personnel (2d ed., LexisNexis 2006): a comprehensive course
book on all aspects of appellate practice and procedure; includes
detailed chapters on the United States Courts of Appeals and the
Supreme Court.
James William Moore, Moore's Federal Practice Rules

Pamphlet Part I (Matthew Bender): a handy desk reference of
rules and statutes published annually.
Linda S. Mullenix, Martin H. Redish & Georgene M.

Vairo, Understanding Federal Courts and Jurisdiction
(Matthew Bender 1998): a concise student handbook on federal
courts and federal procedure.
John E. Nowak & Ronald D. Rotunda, ConstitutionalLaw

(7th ed., Thomson West 2004): a handbook keyed to the
author's multi-volume treatise; helpful on the constitutional
aspects of federal court jurisdiction.
James E. Pfander, Principles of Federal Jurisdiction

(Thomson West 2006): a law student hombook; provides up-to-
date explanations of the leading principles of federal
jurisdiction.
Richard J. Pierce, Sidney A. Shapiro & Paul R. Verkuil,

Administrative Law and Process (4th ed., Foundation Press
2004): a student hornbook that is an abbreviated version of, with
citations to, the multi-volume treatise; a ready introduction to
administrative procedures.
Martin H. Redish, Federal Jurisdiction: Tensions in the

Allocation of Judicial Power (2d ed., Michie Co. 1990): a
collection of essays on federal-state issues; a much cited and
thoughtful treatment by a leading scholar of the federal courts.
Martin H. Redish & Suzanna Sherry, Federal Courts,

Cases, Comments and Questions (6th ed., Thomson West 2007):
a comprehensive casebook that includes the latest court
decisions and scholarly literature.
Thomson West, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: 2008-

2008 Educational Edition (Thomson West 2008): a handy desk
reference of rules and statutes.
Laurence H. Tribe, American ConstitutionalLaw (3d ed.,

Foundation Press 2000): an original synthesis from the author's
orientation; a good resource for constitutional limits on federal
court jurisdiction; the author has since abandoned his plan for a
second volume.
Michael L. Wells, William P. Marshall, & Larry W.

Yackle, Cases and Materialson FederalCourts (Thomson West
2007): up-to-date casebook by three leading federal courts
scholars; emphasizes broad constitutional themes.
* Charles Alan Wright & Mary Kay Kane, Law of Federal
Courts (6th ed., West Group 2002): modestly intended as a
hornbook for law student use, but one of the most frequently-
cited texts in judicial opinions; includes references to the multi-
volume treatise that is one of Charles Alan Wright's great
testaments as a scholar; if a library could buy only one federal
courts volume, this would be it.
Charles Alan Wright, John B. Oakley & Debra Lyn Bassett,

FederalCourts Cases and Materials (12th ed., Foundation Press
2008): traditional casebook that emphasizes jurisdiction and
procedure; notes are sparse; mostly opinions; teaches the subject
of federal courts for lawyers.
III. STUDIES AND BOOKS
* Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Annual Reports

of the Director of the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts:
detailed statistics; available over time for comparisons and trend
analyses; the mother lode of stats; enough to satisfy any federal

court wonk.
American Bar Association, Action Commission to Reduce

Court Costs and Delay (1978): proposed several intramural
procedural reforms to make appellate procedure more efficient
and less judge-labor intensive; relied on the belief that appellate
judges could do more work, if they worked more efficiently;
issued subsequent reports and research findings intended to
reduce court costs and delays, including Final Report of the
Action Commission to Reduce Court Costs and Delay (ABA
1984), and Project Reports and Research Findings Supporting
The Final Report of the Action Commission to Reduce Court
Costs and Delay (ABA 1984).
American Bar Association Standing Committee on Federal

Judicial Improvements, The United States Courts of Appeals:
Reexamining Structure and Process After a Century of Growth
(ABA 1989): expressed concern that the seemingly inexorable
trend towards more appeals of greater complexity would
overwhelm the courts of appeals; urged continued study;
encouraged consideration of various proposals addressing
intercircuit conflicts, limited en bancs, subject matter panels,
and appellate case management techniques.
American Bar Association, Judicial Administration

Division, Standards Relating to Appellate Courts (ABA 1994):
comprehensive standards dealing with all aspects of appellate
procedure.
American Bar Foundation, Accommodating the Workload

of the United States Courts of Appeals (Am. Bar Found. 1968):
expressed concerns for growing appellate caseload;
recommended various intramural procedural reforms to increase
efficiency; contemplated splitting circuits and adding
judgeships.
American Law Institute, Study of the Division of

JurisdictionBetween State and Federal Courts (ALI 1969): one
of the earliest studies of the modem federal court system;
recommended that a narrowing of subject matter jurisdiction at

the district court level would result in a decrease in the case load
demand at the appellate level.
Carl Baar, Judgeship Creation in the Federal Courts:

Optionsfor Reform (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 1981): a study of the steps in
the decisionmaking to create new federal judgeships.
* Thomas E. Baker, Rationing Justice on Appeal: the
Problems of the U.S. Courts of Appeals (West Publg. Co. 1994):
a comprehensive study by the author of this bibliography;
surveys the literature on the courts of appeals; chronicles studies
and proposal for reform.
Deborah J. Barrow, Gary Zuk & Gerard S. Gryski, The

Federal Judiciary and Institutional Change (U. Mich. Press
1996): a political science account of the partisan and
institutional changes on the federal bench.
Lawrence Baum, The Puzzle of Judicial Behavior (U.

Mich. Press 1997): a pioneering work in the field of judicial
behavior.
Gordon Bermant, Patricia A. Lombard & Carroll Seron,

The Cases of the United States Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia Circuit (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 1982): examines the relative
judicial and administrative burdens produced by various case
types in the D.C. Circuit; the study confirms that the burden
arising from the quantity of material presented to the court for
consideration is greater in administrative agency cases than in
other case types.
Gordon Bermant, Edward Sussman, William W. Schwarzer

& Russell R. Wheeler, Imposing a Moratorium on the Number
of Federal Judges: Analysis of Arguments and Implications
(Fed. Jud. Ctr. 1993): tracks the debate over capping the size of
the federal judiciary by limiting the number of authorized
judgeships.
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY- FEDERAL APPEALS
* Benjamin N. Cardozo, The Nature of the JudicialProcess

(Yale U. Press 1921): a classic account of how an appellate
judge decides; written by an historic Justice of the Supreme
Court who previously sat with great distinction on a state high
court.
* Paul D. Carrington, Daniel J. Meador & Maurice
Rosenberg, Justice on Appeal (West Publg. 1976): a classic
scholarly account of appellate courts, their history and
development; published after a national conference in 1975.
Joe S. Cecil, Administration ofJustice in a Large Appellate

Court: The Ninth Circuit Innovations Project (Fed. Jud. Ctr.
1985): describes the series of procedural innovations adopted by
the Ninth Circuit from 1980 to 1982.
Joe S. Cecil & Donna Stienstra, Deciding Cases Without

Argument: An Examination of Four Courts of Appeals (Fed. Jud.
Ctr. 1987): study of the summary calendar.
Jonathan M. Cohen, Inside Appellate Courts: the Impact of

Court Organization on Judicial Decision Making in the United
States Courts of Appeals (U. Mich. Press 2002): analyzes how
the courts of appeals adapted to increasing workloads; explores
the idea of judicial culture in those courts.
* Frank M. Coffin, On Appeal: Courts, Lawyering, and
Judging (W.W. Norton 1994): an insightful account of how
appellate courts function; written by one of the leading appellate
jurists of his generation.
Commission on Revision of the Federal Court Appellate

System, The GeographicalBoundaries of the Several Judicial
Circuits: Recommendations for Change (1973) (reprinted in 62
F.R.D. 223): the "Hruska Commission" report, part I;
recommended various intramural reforms to improve the
efficiency of appellate procedures.
Commission on Revision of the Federal Court Appellate

System, Structure and Internal Procedures:Recommendations
for Change (1975) (reprinted in 67 F.R.D. 195): the "Hruska

Commission" report, part II; recommended the creation of a new
national court of appeals to decide appeals referred from the
Supreme Court and appeals transferred from the courts of
appeals; the division of the Fifth Circuit and the creation of the
Eleventh Circuit, in 1981, can be traced to this report.
* Commission On Structural Alternatives for the Federal

Courts of Appeals, Commission on Structural Alternatives for
the FederalCourts of Appeals: Final Report (1998): popularly-
known as the White Commission after its chair, Justice Byron
White; congressionally-created; reported on proposals to divide
the Ninth Circuit; analyzed proposals for revising the appellate
structure of all the courts of appeals.
Frank B. Cross, Decision Making in the U.S. Courts of

Appeals (Stanford U. Press 2007): comprehensive study;
includes bibliographical references.
Department of Justice Committee on Revision of the

Federal Judicial System, The Needs of the Federal Courts
(1977): recommended some reductions of original jurisdiction;
proposed the creation of administrative courts under Article I to
hear appeals from federal agencies.
William Domnarski, In the Opinion of the Court (U. Ill.

Press 1996): an exploration of the reporting and writing of
judicial opinions.
Samuel Estreicher & John Sexton, Redefining the Supreme

Court's Role: A Theory of Managing the Federal Judicial
Process (Yale U. Press 1986): a comprehensive assessment of
the federal appellate court system, with an emphasis on the role
of the Supreme Court.
The Federal Appellate Judiciary in the Twenty-first

Century (Cynthia Harrison & Russell R. Wheeler, eds., Fed. Jud.
Ctr. 1989): as its title suggests, contemplates what the new
century will bring for the federal appellate courts; an edited
book of essays by lawyers, judges, and academics.
* Federal Courts Study Committee, Judicial Conference of

the United States, Report of the Federal Courts Study Committee
(1990): this committee was appointed by Chief Justice
Rehnquist at Congress's request in response to increasing delays
in processing cases due to quickly increasing caseloads; the
report sets out the committee's description of problems, and its
proposed structural and managerial reforms to the federal court
system; summarizes relevant figures underlying their proposals;
a separate volume (Part III of the report) has more detailed
analysis and background memoranda written by staff and
consultants.
Federal Judicial Center, Appellate Court Caseweights

Project (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 1977): an attempt to develop estimates of
relative workload in the courts of appeals without detailed
timekeeping by judges; the experiment had judges estimate the
relative workload associated with various appeal types, and their
estimates were used to calculate case weights; concluded that
the weighted caseloads produced by this method were not useful
measures of appellate workload; cautioned that the method
could not be adequately assessed given the inconsistencies in the
appellate court statistical reporting.
Federal Judicial Center, Central Legal Staffs in the United

States Courts of Appeals: A Survey of Internal Operating
Procedures(Fed. Jud. Ctr. 1978): a discussion of the use of staff
attorneys in each court, based on reports prepared by senior staff
attorneys.
Federal Judicial Center, Report of the Study Group on the

Caseload of the Supreme Court (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 1972) (reprinted
in 57 F.R.D. 573): the "Freund Committee" report; championed
the creation of a new national court of appeals that would screen
petitions for certiorari to the Supreme Court and decide conflicts
among the circuits; the proposal was controversial and nothing
came of it.
Federal Judicial Center, Template for Chief Circuit Judges'

Deskbooks (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 2001): responding to requests from
chief judges and as a follow-up to a 2000 conference for
appellate judges, the FJC developed this common template that

each circuit could use to develop its own deskbook for the chief
judge; provides a comprehensive list of activities that chief
judges perform in the administration of the courts of appeals.
Steven Flanders & James E. Langner, Comparative Report

on Internal Operating Procedures of United States Courts of
Appeals (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 1973): a description of procedures in six
stages of the appellate process: notification, documentation,
argumentation, decision, publication, and mandate; also
describes procedures related to judicial conferences, councils,
committees, and circuit executives; bar admission and
regulation; court support personnel, staff attorneys, and libraries.
Jerry Goldman, Measuringa Rate of Appeal (Fed. Jud. Ctr.

1973): preliminary study; out of date.
Arthur D. Hellman, Unresolved Intercircuit Conflicts: The

Nature and Scope of the Problem, Final Report: Phase I (Fed.
Jud. Ctr. 1991): reports on an empirical study of the uniformity
in federal law across the circuits.
Virginia A. Hettinger, Stefanie A. Lindquist & Wendy L.

Martinek, Judging on a Collegial Court: Influences on Federal
Appellate Decision Making (U. Va. Press 2006): investigates the
circumstances when a judge is likely to write a separate
concurring or dissenting opinion.
* Judicial Conference of the United States, Long Range
Plan for the Federal Courts (Comm. On Long Range Planning
1995): the Third Branch developed and adopted this long range
planning document.
David E. Klein, Making Law in the United States Courts of

Appeals (Cambridge U. Press 2002): explores the legal and
behavioral facets of how the courts of appeals are situated as an
intermediate court of error correction.
Carol Krafka, Joe S. Cecil & Patricia Lombard, Stalking the

Increase in the Rate of FederalAppeals (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 1995): a
study of the increase in the number of appeals and the increase
in the rate of appeals.
Ashlyn K. Kuersten & Donald R. Songer, Decisions of the

U.S. Courts of Appeals (Garland Publg. 2001): outlines the
structures and procedures of the courts of appeals; provides
longitudinal data on litigants; utilizes statistical programs and
databases; includes tables and charts.
Karl N. Llewellyn, How Appellate Courts Decide Cases

(Brandeis Lawyers' Socy. 1951): a classic; included for its
history and timelessness as well as out of a sense of nostalgia.
Thomas B. Marvell, Appellate Courts and Lawyers:

Information Gathering in the Adversary System (Greenwood
Press 1978): describes how lawyers interact with appellate
courts.
* Judith A. McKenna, Structuraland Other Alternativesfor
the Federal Courts of Appeals: Report to the United States
Congress and the JudicialConference of the United States (Fed.
Jud. Ctr. 1993): commissioned by Congress; hypothesizes
various futures for the federal courts and contemplates the
various proposals to reform them.
Judith A. McKenna, Laural L. Hooper & Mary Clark, Case

Management Proceduresin the Federal Courts ofAppeals (Fed.
Jud. Ctr. 2000): detailed consideration of intramural procedures
of appellate case management, such as the screening,
nonargument calendar, and decisions without published
opinions.
Daniel J. Meador & Jordana S. Bernstein, Appellate Courts

in the United States (West Publg. Co. 1994): compact handbook
on the appellate courts, state and federal.
Rita M. Novak & Douglas K. Somerlot, Delay on Appeal:

A Process for Identifying Causes and Cures (ABA 1990):
evaluates the causes and cures for appellate delay against the
ABA Standards for Appellate Courts.
Judges On Judging: View from the Bench (David M.

O'Brien ed., 3d ed., CQ Press 2009): a collection of essays
about appellate judging written by judges.
Anthony Partridge & E. Allan Lind, A Reevaluation of the

Civil Appeals Management Plan (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 1983): an early
study of case management procedures in the courts of appeals.
* Richard A. Posner, How Judges Think (Harvard U. Press

2008): the smartest jurist of his generation not to have served on
the Supreme Court focuses his considerable intellect on the craft
of judging; an intellectual tour de force.
* Richard A. Posner, The Federal Courts-Challengeand

Reform (Harvard U. Press 1996): a successor edition-the
subtitle to the prior edition was "Crisis and Reform"; one of the
leading federal judges of this generation examines the workload
and work ways of the federal courts with an emphasis on the
courts of appeals.
Tim Reagan et. al., Citations to Unpublished Opinions in

the Federal Courts of Appeals (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 2005):
comprehensive study of the practice.
RestructuringJustice: The Innovations of the Ninth Circuit

and the Future of the Federal Courts (Arthur D. Hellman, ed.,
Cornell U. Press 1990): a collection of essays analyzing the
reforms taken by the Ninth Circuit in response to its unusually
large caseload, and speculating on how useful those reforms
could be for other federal courts of appeals.
Richard L. Revesz, Distinctive Practices of the Second

Circuit (Found. Fed. B. Council 1989): examines the local legal
culture of the Second Circuit.
William L. Reynolds & William M. Richman, An

Evaluation of Limited Publication in the United States Courts of
Appeals (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 1982): early study of the use of
unpublished opinions.
Christopher E. Smith, Judicial Self-Interest: Federal

Judges and Court Administration (Praeger 1995): examines how
judges develop judicial policies and how they go about
reforming the courts.
Donald R. Songer, Reginald S. Sheehan & Susan B. Haire,

Continuity and Change on the United States Courts of Appeals
(U. Mich. Press 2000): uses the National Science Foundation
database of courts of appeals decisions; a comprehensive
examination of the trends in appointments, changes in workload,
increased levels of conflict, and regional differences among the
courts of appeals.
Maxwell L. Steams, Appellate Courts Inside and Out (Geo.

Mason U. Sch. of Law 2003): law and economics working
papers.
Donna Stienstra & Joe S. Cecil, The Role of Staff Attorneys

and Face-to-Face Conferencing in Non-Argument
Decisionmaking: A View From the Tenth Circuit (Fed. Jud. Ctr.
1989): these appellate ADR programs have been implemented in
most, if not all, of the remaining circuits since this study.
Stephen L. Wasby, Appellate Courts and Judicial

Administration (Inst. Ct. Mgt. 1981): study of judicial
administration.
William L. Whittaker, Comparative Study of the Internal

Operations and Process of Three U.S. Courts of Appeals (Fed.
Jud. Ctr. 1972): summarizes and compares the local appellate
procedures in three courts of appeals.
G. Edward White, The American Judicial Tradition:

Profiles of Leading American Judges (Oxford U. Press 1976):
one of the leading accounts of the formation and evolution of
American judicial traditions.
G. Edward White, The Appellate Opinion as Historical

Source Material (Am. Bar Found. 1971): a prominent legal
historian examines judicial opinions as history.
Larry W. Yackle, Reclaiming the Federal Courts (Harvard

U. Press 1994): a critique of how the courts have closed the door
to the federal courthouse by invoking case or controversy
doctrines such as standing.
IV. MANUALS
* Chambers Handbook for Judges' Law Clerks and
Secretaries (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 1994): a successor volume combining
two separate previous volumes; provides an overview of
chambers operations and the work of the federal courts; a nuts-
and-bolts account.
* Steven A. Childress & Martha S. Davis, Standards of
Review (3d ed., Matthew Bender 1999): 2 vols.; the most
thorough, comprehensive, and up-to-date treatment of standards
of review; gives separate treatment for civil, criminal, and
administrative matters.
* Harry T. Edwards & Linda A. Elliot, Federal Courts
Standards of Review: Appellate Court Review of District Court
Decisions & Agency Actions (Thomson West 2007): describes
the doctrinal frameworks informing the various standards of
review; examines the relevant statutes and applicable rules of
procedure; focuses on leading Supreme Court decisions.
Richard A. Givens, Manual of Federal Practice (5th ed.,

Lexis Law Publg. 1998): provides two good chapters on
appellate practice and procedure; guides an attorney through the
steps of an appeal.
* Eugene Gressman, Robert L. Stem, Kenneth S. Geller &

Stephen M. Shapiro, Supreme Court Practice: For Practice in
the Supreme Court of the United States (9th ed., Bureau of Nati.
Affairs 2007): the Bible of Supreme Court practice; provides a
detailed treatment of review of courts of appeals; many topics
are analogous to jurisdiction of the courts of appeals, such as
finality and extraordinary writs.
Randy Hertz & James S. Liebman, FederalHabeas Corpus

Practice and Procedure (5th ed., LexisNexis 2005): 2 vols.;
designed to guide the practitioner through the post-AEDPA
world of habeas procedure; chapters 34-38 detail the appellate
stages up to certiorari.
* David G. Knibb, Federal Court of Appeals Manual: A
Manual on Practice in the United States Courts of Appeal (5th
ed., Thomson West 2007): a practical guide for attorneys who
will be bringing cases to the U.S. courts of appeals; sections
written in a Q&A format but with thorough answers; primarily
covers procedural matters, but does devote some space to more
substantive issues, such as standard of review.
Herbert Monte Levy, How to Handle an Appeal (4th ed.,

P.L.I. 1999): a good practitioner's guide to appellate jurisdiction
and practice; additional emphasis on advocacy skills; chapter 11
is specifically devoted to the courts of appeals.
Frank 0. Loveland, The Appellate Jurisdiction of the

Federal Courts (W. H. Anderson Co. 1911): too far out of date
to rely on, except for historical research.
Roy B. Marker, Federal Appellate Jurisdiction and

Procedure (Callaghan & Co. 1935 & Supps. to 1938): too far
out of date to rely on, except for historical research.
Robert J. Martineau, Modern Appellate Practice:Federal

and State Civil Appeals (Lawyers Coop. Publg. Co. 1983 &
Supps. to 1994): "modem" connotes last twenty-five years;
covered both state and federal civil appeals; scholarly and
practical; well researched, with extensive citations and cross-

references; not being updated.
Paul P. O'Brien, Manual of Federal Appellate Procedure

(Pernau-Walsh Print. Co. 3d ed. 1941): a compilation of rules
and statute with brief commentary; out of date.
Roscoe Pound, Appellate Procedure in Civil Cases (Little,

Brown & Co. 1941): provides an extensive history and
comparative material; only one chapter devoted to the "present
century"; presents proposals for reform; useful for perspective
and history.
Thomas W. Powell, The Law of Appellate Proceedings:in

Relation to Review, Error,Appeal, and Other Reliefs Upon Final
Judgments (T. & J.W. Johnson & Co. 1872): noteworthy as the
earliest attempt at a separate treatise on appeals; too far out of
date to rely on, except for historical research.
* George K. Rahdert & Larry M. Roth, Appeals to the Fifth
CircuitManual (Butterworth Legal Publishers 1977 & Supps. to
2005): 2 vols.; very comprehensive guidelines to appellate
practice and procedure; detailed reference and synthesis to U.S.
Code, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, local rules, internal
operating procedures, etc.; cited here as being representative of
other circuit-by-circuit manuals, written for practitioners, that
provide valuable and quick reference.
* Antonin Scalia & Bryan A. Garner, Making Your Case:
The Art of Persuading Judges (Thomson West 2008): a new
masterpiece on appellate advocacy; the best stylist on the
Supreme Court and the leading guru on legal usage collaborate
to create an instant classic.
Standing Committee on Continuing Education of the Bar,

American Bar Association, Appellate Advocacy (Peter J. Carre,
Azike A. Ntephe & Helen C. Trainor eds., ABA Prof. Educ.
Publications 1981): a collection of essays and speeches by
lawyers and judges on appellate practice; a good compilation on
the nature of the appellate process; little on jurisdiction.
Robert L. Stem, Appellate Practicein the United States (2d

ed., Bureau of Natl. Affairs 1989): a comprehensive handbook
on the appellate process, with emphasis on brief writing and oral
argument.
Neva B. Talley-Morris, Appellate Civil Practice and

Procedure Handbook (Prentice-Hall 1975): designed for the
general practitioner; first part covers state systems and second
part covers federal appeals; very basic.
* Michael E. Tigar & Jane B. Tigar, Federal Appeals:
Jurisdiction and Practice (3d ed., West Group 1999): current
and thorough; the jurisdiction portion elaborates the important
topics; presents well-chosen and helpful citations; coauthored by
one of the premier appellate lawyers of this generation.
Paul G. Ulrich, FederalAppellate Practice9th Circuit (2d

ed., West Group 1999): 2 vols.; another example of the
comprehensive reference books commercially available to
attorneys taking appeals to the various courts of appeals.
Frederick Wiener, Briefing and Arguing FederalAppeals-

with an appendix of late authorities including references to the
Supreme Court's 1967 rules (Bureau of Natl. Affairs 1967):
emphasizes appellate advocacy; the best treatment of its kind;
regrettably dated; this is how a first-rate appellate lawyer viewed
the appellate process.
* Larry W. Yackle, Postconviction Remedies (Lawyers

Coop. Publg. Co. 1981 & Cumulative Supp. to 2007): the writ of
habeas corpus is pure procedure, and this is the best single
volume on the great writ.
Elijah N. Zoline, Federal Appellate Jurisdiction and

Procedure (Clark Boardman Co.. 2d ed. 1924): too far out of
date to rely on, except for historical research.
V. SYMPOSIA
* 2005 National Conference on Appellate Justice, 8 J. App.

Prac. & Process 65 (2006): co-sponsored by the American
Academy of Appellate Lawyers, Federal Judicial Center, and the
National Center for State Courts; includes comprehensive
statistical tables; selected presentations and addresses; this
national conference brought together jurists, lawyers, and
academics to consider the current state of appellate courts.
Annual l0th Circuit Survey, Den. U. L. Rev.: an annual

symposium issue.
Annual Review of Criminal Procedure Decisions of the

Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals, Geo. L.J.: an annual
symposium.
The Bicentennial Celebration of the Courts of the District

of Columbia Circuit, 90 Geo. L.J. 545, 545-834 (2002): several
articles describing the impact of the Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia on administrative law.
* Civil Appellate Jurisdiction:PartI, 47 Law & Contemp.
Probs., Issue 2 Spring 1984, at 1, 1-248; Civil Appellate
Jurisdiction: Part II, 47 Law & Contemp. Probs., Issue 3
Summer 1984, at 1, 1-179: written in the form of a restatement
of the law; Part I is a valuable research tool and able synthesis;
Part II adds a comparative perspective to include Canada,
France, and Germany.
Eighth Circuit Survey, Creighton L. Rev.: a regular feature.
Eleventh Circuit Survey, Mercer L. Rev.: an annual

symposium issue.
Federal Courts Law Review: an electronic law review

published on line; editorial board consists of U.S. magistrate
judges and law school professors.
Fifth Circuit Symposium, Loy. L. Rev.: a regular feature.
Fifth Circuit Survey, Tex. Tech L. Rev.: an annual

symposium issue.
Ninth Circuit Survey, Golden Gate U. L. Rev.: an annual

symposium issue.
Seventh Circuit Review, Chicago-Kent L. Rev.: semi-

annual online journal analyzing recent decisions of the Seventh
Circuit.
* The Supreme Court **** Term, Harv. L. Rev.: an annual
symposium; each November issue is devoted to selected
decisions from the preceding term.
Symposium, Managing the Federal Courts; Will the Ninth

Circuit be a Model for Change? 34 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 315,
315-592 (2000): discusses the Ninth Circuit's experiences and
their implication for the future operation of the federal courts of
appeals in general.
Symposium, Ninth Circuit Conference, 48 Ariz. L. Rev.

221, 221-367 (2006): a symposium organized to discuss issues
affecting the Ninth Circuit in particular, such as "limited" en
banc rehearings, caseload, and reversals by the Supreme Court.
Symposium, RestructuringFederalCourts, 78 Tex. L. Rev.

1399, 1399-1866 (2000): a symposium discussing the effects
that recent legislation such as the Anti-Terrorism and Effective
Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) have had on judicial review of
immigration and criminal appeals.
Third Circuit Review, Villanova L. Rev.: an annual

symposium issue.
VI. ARTICLES & ANNOTATIONS
A. Background and Overview
History of the courts of appeals;future of the courts of appeals; the principle

of limitedjurisdiction;rules ofprecedent.
Lloyd C. Anderson, The CollateralOrder Doctrine:A New

"Serbonian Bog" and Four Proposalsfor Reform, 46 Drake L.
Rev. 539 (1998): a comprehensive account of the doctrine
complete with extensive citations of authority.
Thomas E. Baker, Imagining the Alternative Futures of the

U.S. Courts of Appeals, 28 Ga. L. Rev. 913 (1994): examines
the many alternative proposals for revising the federal appellate
structure to meet future needs for greater appellate capacity.
Paul D. Carrington, The Function of the Civil Appeal: A

Late Century View, 38 S.C. L. Rev. 411 (1987): traces the
history and function of civil appeals.
Paul D. Carrington, The Power of DistrictJudges and the

Responsibility of Courts of Appeals, 3 Ga. L. Rev. 507 (1969): a
general exploration of the relationship of federal trial court and
appellate court.
Steven Alan Childress, Standards of Review Primer:

Federal Civil Appeals, 229 F.R.D. 267 (2005): comprehensive
summary of standards of review on appeal.
Frank B. Cross, Decisionmaking in the U.S. Courts of

Appeals, 91 Cal. L. Rev. 1457 (2003): applies various legal and
political theories to the courts of appeals; the study concludes
that legal and political factors are statistically significant
detenninants of decisions, with legal factors having the greatest
impact, while strategic and litigant-driven factors have no
significance.
Meghan Dunn & Rebecca Norwick, Report of a Survey of

Videoconferencing in the Courts of Appeals (Fed Jud. Ctr.
2006): describes the ways in which videoconferencing is used in
the courts of appeals.
Scott E. Gant, Missing the Forestfor a Tree: Unpublished

Opinions and New Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1,
47 B.C. L. Rev. 705 (2006): a brief but thoughtful discussion of
the history of Fed. R. App. P. 32.1, which allows attorneys to
cite unpublished/nonprecedential opinions in their briefs.
Michelle Migdal Gee, What Standards Govern Appellate

Review of Trial Court's Conditional Ruling, Pursuant to Rule
50(c)(1) of FederalRules of Civil Procedure on Party's Motion
for New Trial, 52 A.L.R. Fed. 494 (1981).
Alan R. Gilbert, In Banc Proceedings in Federal Courts of

Appeals, 37 A.L.R. Fed. 274 (1978).
Chris Guthrie & Tracey E. George, The Futility of Appeal:

DisciplinaryInsights into the "Affirmance Affect" on the United
States Courts of Appeals, 32 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 357 (2005):
applies social science theories to try to explain the high
percentage (approximately ninety percent) of affirmances in the
courts of appeals.
Arthur D. Hellman, Jumboism and Jurisprudence: The

Theory and Practiceof Precedent in the Large Appellate Court,
56 U. Chi. L. Rev. 541 (1989): analyzes Ninth Circuit decisions
and concludes that its case law is not as inconsistent as has been
claimed by some commentators.
Mark Herrmann, Thermtron Revisited: When and How

Federal Trial Court Remand Orders are Reviewable, 19 Ariz.
St. L.J. 395 (1987): a good discussion of removal-remand
appealability.
Marie Leary, Defining the "Majority" Vote Requirement in

Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a) for Rehearings En
Banc in the United States Courts of Appeals (Fed. Jud. Ctr.
2002): this report was prepared at the request of the Judicial

Conference Committee on Appellate Rules as they considered
proposing a uniform rule on en banc voting procedures for the
courts of appeals.
Martin B. Louis, Allocating Adjudicative Decision Making

Authority Between the Trial and Appellate Levels: A Unified
View of the Scope of Review, the Judge/Jury Question and
ProceduralDiscretion, 64 N.C. L. Rev. 993 (1986): a general
and theoretical treatment of the relationship between trial court
and appellate court.
Robert J. Martineau, The Appellate Process in Civil Cases:

A Proposed Model, 63 Marq. L. Rev. 163 (1979): a broad
overview of the appellate process and components of that
process; provides general citations.
Robert J. Martineau, Considering New Issues on Appeal:

The General Rule and the Gorilla Rule, 40 Vand. L. Rev. 1023
(1987): a thoughtful and complete consideration of this critical
issue for scope of review.
Peter G. McCabe, Renewal of the Federal Rulemaking

Process, 44 Am. U. L. Rev. 1655 (1995): the author was the
secretary to the Judicial Conference Standing Committee on
Rules of Practice and Procedure of the United States Courts;
provides a history of the rulemaking process for federal courts
and describes the process today.
Daniel J. Meador, A Challenge to Judicial Architecture:

Modifying the Regional Design of the U.S. Courts ofAppeals, 56
U. Chi. L. Rev. 603 (1989): gives a brief history of the creation
of non-regional, subject-specific courts of appeals; argues for
the creation of more of these kinds of courts; uses caselaw data
to show that some subjects are already concentrated in specific
regional courts of appeals.
Daniel J. Meador, Origin of the Federal Circuit: A

PersonalAccount, 41 Am. U. L. Rev. 581 (1992): the author,
who was the Assistant Attorney General in the DOJ's Office for
Improvements in the Administration of Justice; offers an

insider's history of the creation of the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Federal Circuit.
John F. Nangle, The Ever Widening Scope of Fact Review

in FederalAppellate Courts-Is the "Clearly Erroneous Rule"
Being Avoided? 59 Wash. U. L.Q. 409 (1981): an evaluation of
this rule from the perspective of a federal district judge.
Robert J. Niemic, Mediation & Conference Programs in

the Federal Courts of Appeals: A Sourcebook for Judges and
Lawyers (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 2d ed. 2006): a reference guide on
mediation and settlement conference programs in the thirteen
federal courts of appeals.
Charles W. Nihan & Russell R. Wheeler, Administering the

Federal Judicial Circuits: A Survey of Chief Judges'
Approaches and Procedures (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 1982): describes
how chief judges discharged their administrative responsibilities
in the early 1980s; based on interviews with chief judges, circuit
executives, and other court personnel.
Robert M. Parker & Ron Chapman, Jr., Accepting Reality:

The Time for Adopting DiscretionaryReview in the Courts of
Appeals Has Arrived, 50 SMU L. Rev. 573 (1997): suggests that
the courts of appeals have evolved their procedures to a de facto
certiorari system and recommends that it should be made a de
jure system of discretionary appeals.
Maurice Rosenberg, Appellate Review of Trial Court

Discretion, 79 F.R.D. 173 (1978): a general treatment of scope
of review of discretion.
Jean F. Rydstrom, Construction and Application of Rule

60(b)(6) of FederalRules of Civil ProcedureAuthorizing Relief
from Final Judgment or Order for "Any Other Reason", 15
A.L.R. Fed. 193 (1973).
Bruce M. Selya, Publish and Perish: The Fate of The

FederalAppeals Judge in the Information Age, 55 Ohio St. L.J.
405 (1994): First Circuit Judge Selya proposes reducing the

number of officially published decisions in response to courts'
increasing caseload.
Suzanna Sherry, Logic Without Experience: The Problem

of the Federal Appellate Courts, 82 Notre Dame L. Rev. 97
(2006): discerns a subtle but contradictory trend in recent
appellate decisions to expand federal jurisdiction while at the
same time contract judicial discretion.
Kenneth W. Starr, The Supreme Court and Its Shrinking

Docket: The Ghost of William Howard Taft, 90 Minn. L. Rev.
1363 (2006): examines the implications for the federal court
system of the tendency of the Supreme Court to grant review in
fewer and fewer cases.
Joan Steinman, After Steel Co.: "Hypothetical

Jurisdiction" in the FederalAppellate Courts, 58 Wash. & Lee
L. Rev. 855 (2001): focuses on the Supreme Court decision
disapproving of the concept of hypothetical jurisdiction;
explores some of the remaining questions left open.
Student Author, Appealability in the Federal Courts, 75

Harv. L. Rev. 351 (1961): examines various bases of review.
Catherine T. Struve, The Paradox of Delegation:

Interpretingthe FederalRules of Civil Procedure, 150 U. Pa. L.
Rev. 1099 (2002): an overview of federal rulemaking procedure,
including the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Carl Tobias, A Divisional Arrangement of the Federal

Appeals Courts, 43 Ariz. L. Rev. 633 (2001): critiques a
proposal to split the Ninth Circuit into regional divisions and to
do the same for other Circuits should they reach a certain size.
John F. Wagner, Jr., Construction and Application of Rule

60(b)(5) of FederalRules of Civil Procedure,Authorizing Relief
From Final Judgment Where Its Prospective Application Is
Inequitable, 117 A.L.R. Fed. 419 (1994).
B. ProceduresRelated to the Exercise of Subject-Matter

Jurisdiction
Derivativejurisdiction;scope of review; standingto appeal; sources of

appeals; locus of appeals; notice of appeal; transferringappeals;
miscellaneousprocedures.
Debra Lyn Bassett, "I Lost at Trial-in the Court of

Appeals! ": The Expanding Power of the Federal Appellate
Courts to Reexamine Facts, 38 Hous. L. Rev. 1129 (2001): a
critical examination of the phenomenon in the title.
Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss, The Federal Circuit: A Case

Study in Specialized Courts, 64 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 1 (1989): looks
at the first five years of the Federal Circuit's case law and
reviews its appellate procedures and sense of appellate
jurisdiction.
Effect of Filing of Notice of Appeal on Motion to Vacate

Judgment Under Rule 60(b) of Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure,62 A.L.R. Fed. 165 (1983).
Roger P. Freeman, Sufficiency of "Designation" Under

Federal Appellate Procedure Rule 3(c) of Judgment or Order
Appealed from in Civil Cases by Notice of Appeal Not
Specifically DesignatingSuch Judgment or Order, 141 A.L.R.
Fed. 445 (1997).
Alan R. Gilbert, Composition of Record on Appeal from

District Court Under Rule 10(a) of Federal Rules of Appellate
Mark H. Hall, The JurisdictionalNature of the Time to

Appeal, 21 Ga. L. Rev. 399 (1986): discusses limitations on the
time to appeal; criticizes the current approach to treat timeliness
as jurisdictional.
Phillip E. Hassman, Right of Class Member, in Class

Action Under Rule 23 of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to
Appeal from Order Approving Settlement with Class, 30 A.L.R.
Fed. 846 (1976).
Allan Ides, The Authority of a Federal District Court to

Proceed After a Notice of Appeal Has Been Filed, 143 F.R.D.
307 (1992): discusses the actions a district court can take in a
case after the notice of appeal has been filed.
David A. Johns, Construction of Provision in Rule 4(a) of

Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (Formerly Civil
Procedure Rule 73(a)), Making an Exception as to Time for
FilingNotice of Appeal from District Court to Court of Appeals
in Civil Case "If the United States or an Officer or Agency
Thereof is a Party",9 A.L.R. Fed. 611 (1971).
Sara L. Johnson, Effect of Party's Failure to File Timely

Objections, Under 28 USCS § 636(b)(1), to Magistrate's
Findings or Recommendations on Right of Review in Appellate
Court, 80 A.L.R. Fed. 921 (1986).
Janet Boeth Jones, Tolling of Time for Filing Notice of

Appeal in Civil Action in Federal Court Under Rule 4(a)(4) of
Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, 74 A.L.R. Fed. 516
(1985).
Teresia B. Jovanovic, Standing of Attorney to Appeal

Federal Court Order Denying, or Limiting Amount of
Attorney's Fees to Client, 72 A.L.R. Fed. 417 (1985).
Daniel A. Klein, When Will PrematureNotice of Appeal Be

Retroactively Validated in Federal Civil Case, 76 A.L.R. Fed.
199 (1986).
Marie Leary, Analysis of Briefing Requirements in the

United States Courts of Appeals (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 2004): the FJC
prepared this report to assist the Judicial Conference Advisory
Committee on the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure to
evaluate reported problems with and potential amendments to
Rules 28 and 32 on the content and cover of briefs.
Bruce I. McDaniel, Plaintiff's Right to Appeal Adverse

Judgment on One Cause of Action as Affected by Acceptance of
Remittitur on Another Cause of Action, 41 A.L.R. Fed. 856

(1979).
Jonathan Remy Nash, Resuscitating Deference to Lower

Court Judges' Interpretationsof State Law, 77 S. Cal. L. Rev.
975 (2004): a brief history of federal appellate courts' standard
of deference to district courts on interpretations of state law;
concludes that such deference is well-ingrained.
Brian H. Redmond, Jurisdiction of United States Court of

Appeals for Federal Circuit Under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292 and
1295, 97 A.L.R. Fed. 694 (1990).
William M. Richman & William L. Reynolds, Elitism,

Expediency, and the New Certiorari:Requiem for the Learned
Hand Tradition, 81 Cornell L. Rev. 273 (1996): argues that the
increased workload of the courts of appeals has effectively
turned them into certiorari courts; calls for the creation of many
more circuit judgeships.
Elizabeth I. Rogers, The Phoenix Precedents: The

Unexpected Rebirth of Regional Circuit Jurisdiction Over
Patent Appeals and the Need for a Considered Congressional
Response, 16 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 411 (2003): analyzes
developments in the case law that have allowed regional courts
of appeal to re-establish jurisdiction over certain types of patent
appeals from the Federal Circuit; argues that Congress should
act to re-establish the Federal Circuit's jurisdiction over these
matters.
Jean F. Rydstrom, Appellate Review of Order Denying

Extension of Time for Filing Notice of Appeal Under Rule 4(A)
of Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, 39 A.L.R. Fed. 829
(1978).
Joan E. Schaffner, Federal Circuit "Choice of Law": Erie

Through the Looking Glass, 81 Iowa L. Rev. 1173 (1996):
critiques the Federal Circuit's choice-of-law doctrine that defers
to regional courts of appeals law on legal issues not within their
exclusive jurisdiction within cases; recommends that the Federal
Circuit exercise independent judgment on all issues within a

case for which it has jurisdiction.
Mary M. Schroeder, Appellate Justice Today: Fairness or

Formulas, 1994 Wis. L. Rev. 9 (1994): Ninth Circuit Judge
Schroeder voices her concern that appellate courts are using
procedural techniques so that they do not have to state what the
law is on an issue.
Ralph V. Seep, Sufficiency of "Specificity" of Designation

of Parties to Appeal in Notice of Appeal Under FederalRule of
Appellate Procedure3(c), 103 A.L.R. Fed. 648 (1991).
Kenneth J. Servay, The 1993 Amendments to Rules 3 and 4

of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure-A Bridge Over
Troubled Water-Or Just Another Trap? 157 F.R.D. 587
(1994): discusses the amendments to the appellate rule; outlines
the requirements for a notice of appeal; establishes the timeline
for taking an appeal.
Joan Steinman, Irregulars: the Appellate Rights of Persons

Who Are Not Full-fledged Parties, 39 Ga. L. Rev. 411 (2005):
examines non-party appeals in various settings, such as class
actions and shareholder derivative suits.
Joan Steinman, The Scope of Appellate Jurisdiction:

Pendent Appellate Jurisdiction Before and After Swint, 49
Hastings L.J. 1337 (1998): survey of the case law regarding
pendent appellate jurisdiction over interlocutory appeals.
Joan Steinman, Shining a Light in a Dim Corner: Standing

to Appeal and the Right to Defend a Judgment in the Federal
Court, 38 Ga. L. Rev. 813 (2004): a comprehensive treatment of
standing to appeal and the right to defend a judgment in the
courts of appeals.
Elizabeth Williams, What Claims Fall Within Limitation

Imposed by § 113(h) of Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (42
U.S.C.A. § 9613(h)) on JudicialReview of Cases Arising Under

CERCLA, 116 A.L.R. Fed. 69 (1993).
C. Appealsfrom FinalDecisions-Civil
Finaldecision requirement; collateralorder doctrine; twilight zone doctrine;

partialfinaljudgments.
Appealability, Under 28 USCS § 1291, of Order Awarding

or DenyingAttorneys'Fees, 73 A.L.R. Fed. 271 (1985).
Stuart Minor Benjamin, Stepping Into the Same River

Twice: Rapidly ChangingFacts and the Appellate Process, 78
Tex. L. Rev. 269 (1999): analyzes the role facts play in
jurisprudential tests; discusses how appellate courts should
handle situations in which the facts have substantially changed
since the case was heard at the trial court.
Rebecca A. Cochran, Gaining Appellate Review by

"Manufacturing" a Final Judgment through Voluntary
Dismissal of PeripheralClaims, 48 Mercer L. Rev. 979 (1997):
examines how some courts of appeals have allowed appeals of
some orders after the parties have obtained a voluntary dismissal
of the remaining aspects of the case.
Carleton M. Crick, The Final Judgment As a Basis for

Appeal, 41 Yale L.J. 539 (1932): explores the venerable
common-law origins of the finality requirement.
Russell J. Davis, Annotation, Necessity of Statement of

Reasons Underlying District Court's Decision to Grant
Certification Under Rule 54(b) of Federal Rules of Civil
Theodore D. Frank, Requiem for the Final Judgment Rule,

45 Tex. L. Rev. 292 (1966): decries laxity regarding finality
brought on by statutory changes and changed judicial attitudes.
Loeb H. Granoff, F.R.A.P. Rule 37-Postudgment

Interest-A Source of Continuing Confusion, 176 F.R.D. 590
(1998): discusses circuit split in interpreting Fed. R. App. P. 37,
involving interest on a judgment.
Michael D. Green, From Here to Attorney's Fees:

Certainty, Efficiency, and Fairness in the Journey to the
Appellate Courts, 69 Cornell L. Rev. 207 (1984): a thorough
exegesis on appealability issues concerning attorney's fees.
Wesley Kobylak, Annotation, Appealability of Federal

Court Order Denying Motion for Appointment of Counsel for
Indigent Party, 67 A.L.R. Fed. 925 (1984).
Mark A. Kromkowski and Jonathan J. Van Handel, Student

Authors, The Collateral Order Doctrine As Applied to
Discovery Requests-the Third Circuit's Kelly v. Ford Motor
Co., 73 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1119 (1997): examines how
discovery orders can be appealed under the collateral order
doctrine.
John P. Ludington, Appealability of Orders in Government

CivilAntitrustActions, 10 A.L.R. Fed. 607 (1972).
Robert J. Martineau, Defining Finality and Appealability by

Court Rule: Right Problem, Wrong Solution, 54 U. Pitt. L. Rev.
717 (1993): considers the desirability and efficacy of defining
finality by court rulemaking.
Bruce I. McDaniel, Appealability Under "Collateral

Order" Doctrine of OrderStaying or Dismissing, or Refusing to
Stay or Dismiss, Proceedings in United States District Court
Pending Federal or State Administrative Determination, 40
A.L.R. Fed. 740 (1978).
Bruce I. McDaniel, Order on Motion to Disqualify Counsel

As Separately Appealable Under 28 USCS § 1291, 44 A.L.R.
Fed. 709 (1979).
John C. Nagel, Student Author, Replacing the Crazy Quilt

of Interlocutory Appeals Jurisprudence with Discretionary
Review, 44 Duke L.J. 200 (1994): recommends that the Supreme
Court exercise its rulemaking authority to define appealability
for interlocutory appeals.
Peter M. Ossorio, Student Author, Tightening the

Collateral Order Doctrine, 50 U. Mo. Kan. City L. Rev. 99
(1981): an analysis of the Supreme Court holding that a district
court order denying a motion to disqualify opposing counsel
does not create a right of immediate appeal, thus restricting the
collateral order doctrine.
Troy Anthony Price, Student Author, Appellate

Procedure-OrdersDisqualifying Counsel Are Not Immediately
Appealable Under the CollateralOrder Exception to 28 U.S. C.
§ 1291, 8 UALR L.J. 531 (1986): a good treatment of this issue.
Milton Roberts, Appealability of Discovery Order as

"FinalDecision" Under 28 USCS § 1291, 36 A.L.R. Fed. 763
(1978).
Patrick J. Schiltz, The Citation of Unpublished Opinions in

the Federal Courts of Appeals, 74 Fordham L. Rev. 23 (2005):
the Reporter for the Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules
of Appellate Procedure describes the history leading up to the
proposal of FRAP 32.1, allowing citation of unpublished/
nonprecedential opinions, and analyzes the arguments for and
against the proposed rule; this article was published before the
formal approval of the amendment, but it offers a good summary
of much of the policy discussion surrounding this rule.
Gregory C. Sisk, The Balkanization of Appellate Justice:

The Proliferationof Local Rules in the Federal Circuits, 68 U.
Colo. L. Rev. 1 (1997): criticizes the increasing number of local
rules created by the courts of appeals; suggests guidelines for
determining when creating a local rule is proper; discusses
means by which extraneous local rules can be stricken.
Joan Steinman, The Effects of Case Consolidation on the

Procedural Rights of Litigants: What They Are, What They
Might Be Part I: Justiciability and Jurisdiction (Original and
Appellate), 42 UCLA L. Rev. 717 (1995): analyzes whether a
party whose case has been consolidated with other, still-ongoing
cases has an immediate right of appeal, and whether their time to
appeal can be extended to match that of the consolidated other
cases.
Student Author, The Appellate Jurisdiction of the

TemporaryEmergency Court of Appeals, 64 Minn. L. Rev. 1247
(1980): an overview of this specialized court's jurisdiction.
Student Author, Appellate Review of Stay Orders in the

Federal Courts, 72 Colum. L. Rev. 518 (1972): sketches the
origins of the stay order-§ 1292(a) & (b); concludes that
federal trial court discretion in granting or denying stays has
been diminished.
Mitchell Waldman, Application of "FugitiveDisentitlement

Doctrine" in FederalCivil Actions, 176 A.L.R. Fed. 333 (2002).
D. Appealsfrom Interlocutory Orders-Civil
Entitled interlocutoryappeals;permissive interlocutoryappeals.
Daniel J. Adelman, Student Author, Time Is of the Essence:

The Case for Amending 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) to Permit
Interlocutory Appeals in Criminal Cases, 1986 Ariz. St. L.J.
727: a good discussion of the policy and practice of permissive
interlocutory appeals.
Bergeron, Pierre H., District Courts as Gatekeepers? A

New Vision of Appellate Jurisdiction Over Orders Compelling
Arbitration, 51 Emory L.J. 1365 (2002): discusses the debate
over how frequently interlocutory appeals should be made, and
what system should be used to govern interlocutory appeals;
argues that district courts should dismiss the case rather than
stay the proceeding when compelling arbitration to allow an

immediate appeal.
John A. Bourdeau, Appealability, Under 28 U.S.C.A. §

1292(a)(1), of Order Approving or Refusing to Approve
ProposedSettlement, 156 A.L.R. Fed. 575 (1999).
Kathleen Brame, Student Author, Civil Procedure-

Interlocutory Appeals: Orders Denying Disqualification of
Counsel Are Not Appealable Pursuant to the Collateral Order
Exception, 56 Tul. L. Rev. 1035 (1982): a fairly comprehensive
review of the topic.
Richard A. Campbell, Student Author, Appealability of

Orders Denying Attorney Disqualification-A Look Beyond
Firestone, 1982 U. Ill. L. Rev. 975: a good treatment of the
topic.
John A. Glenn, Appealability of Order Staying, or Refusing

to Stay, Proceedings in Federal District Court Pending
Arbitration Proceedings, 11 A.L.R. Fed. 640 (1972).
Timothy P. Glynn, Discontent and Indiscretion:

DiscretionaryReview of Interlocutory Orders, 77 Notre Dame
L. Rev. 175 (2001): argues that the current set of exceptions to
the final judgment rule created by a mix of legislative and
judicial decisions is adequate and need not be replaced by a
system of discretionary review of interlocutory orders.
Alexander Holtzoff, Interlocutory Appeals in the Federal

Courts, 47 Geo. L.J. 474 (1959): presents the initial academic
reactions to permissive interlocutory appeals and provides
analysis of the legislative history.
Wesley Kobylak, Review of Federal Judge's Grant or

Denial of Motion to Recuse, 64 A.L.R. Fed. 433 (1983).
Michael R. Lazerwitz, Student Author, The Perlman

Exception: Limitations Required by the Final Decision Rule, 49
U. Chi. L. Rev. 798 (1982): an examination of subpoenaed party

intervenor's right to immediate appeal.
Bruce I. McDaniel, Appealability of Federal Court Order

Granting or Denying Stay of Arbitration, 31 A.L.R. Fed. 234
(1977).
Karen N. Moore, Appellate Review of Judicial

Disqualification Decisions in the Federal Courts, 35 Hastings
L.J. 829 (1984): a sophisticated treatment of the topic, with
alternative theoretical models.
John K. Nelson, Student Author, The Limits of Section

1292(a)(1) Redefined?: Appealability of the Class
Determinationas an Order "Refusing an Injunction ", 9 U. Tol.
L. Rev. 488 (1978): a restrictive reading of § 1292(a)(1) to
restrict proliferation of piecemeal review.
Cedric W. Porter, Appeals from Interlocutory and Final

Decrees in the United States Circuit Courts of Appeal, 19 B.U.
L. Rev. 377 (1939): an extensive article on interlocutory and
final decrees; a good historical perspective.
Robin Rae Rausch, Student Author, The Collateral Order

Doctrine After Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Risjord: The
Appealability of Orders Denying Motions for Appointment of
Counsel, 62 B.U. L. Rev. 845 (1982): a good treatment of the
topic.
Martin H. Redish, The Pragmatic Approach to

Appealability in the Federal Courts, 75 Colum. L. Rev. 89
(1975): deals with aspects of § 1292(b), etc.; concludes that the
so-called pragmatic approach to appealability has suffered from
fundamental confusion as to its basic purposes.
Cassandra Burke Robertson, Appellate Review of Discovery

Orders in Federal Court: A Suggested Approach for Handling
Privilege Claims, 81 Wash. L. Rev. 733 (2006): analyzes
appealing a decision on a privilege claim against a discovery
order; discusses the problems with waiting for final judgment

and the difficulty of obtaining an interlocutory appeal.
Jean F. Rydstrom, Appealability of OrderAllowing Action

to ProceedAs Class Action under Rule 23 of FederalRules of
Civil Procedure, 32 A.L.R. Fed. 674 (1977); note that this
annotation has been superseded by Barbara J. Van Arsdale,
Appealability of Determination Regarding Confirmation of
Action as Class Action Under FederalRule of Civil Procedure
Rule 23 and its EnablingLegislation (28 U.S.C.A. § 1292(e)), 22
ALR Fed. 2d 303 (2007).
Michael E. Solimine & Christine Oliver Hines, Deciding to

Decide: Class Action Certification and InterlocutoryReview by
the United States Courts of Appeals Under Rule 23(W), 41 Wm.
& Mary L. Rev. 1531 (2000): discusses the history of appellate
review of class action certification decisions before Fed. R. Civ.
P. 23(f) and offers suggestions on how the courts of appeals
should exercise their discretion to grant review under this rule.
Adam N. Steinman, Reinventing Appellate Jurisdiction,48

B.C. L. Rev. 1237 (2007): proposes alternative new theories of
appellate jurisdiction for interlocutory orders under the all writs
statute.
Gary D. Spivey, Appealability of DeterminationAdverse to

Confirmation of Action As Class Action Under Rule 23 of
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 17 A.L.R. Fed. 933 (1973);
note that this annotation has been superseded by Barbara J. Van
Arsdale, Appealability of Determination Regarding
Confirmation of Action as Class Action Under Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure Rule 23 and its Enabling Legislation (28
U.S.C.A. § 1292(e)), 22 ALR Fed. 2d 303 (2007).
Gary D. Spivey, Appealability of Federal Court Order

Granting or Denying Consolidation, Severance or Separate
Trials, 30 A.L.R. Fed. 393 (1976).
Student Author, Interlocutory Appeals in the Federal

Courts Under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), 88 Harv. L. Rev. 607 (1975):
an extensive examination of § 1292(b).
Student Author, Section 1292(b): Eight Years of Undefined

Discretion, 54 Geo. L.J. 940 (1966): concludes that double
discretion governs action on appeal; complains that no legal
precedent was established as a guide.
David B. Sweet, Appealability, Under Collateral Order

Doctrine,-ofOrderDenying QualifiedImmunity in 42 U.S. C.A. §
1983 or Bivens Action for Damages Where Claim for Equitable
Relief is Also Pending-Post-HarlowCases, 105 A.L.R. Fed.
851 (1991).
Rhonda Wasserman, Rethinking Review of Remands:

Proposed Amendments to the Federal Removal Statute, 43
Emory L.J. 83 (1994): discusses the history of 28 U.S.C.
§ 1447(d), which bars appellate review of orders remanding a
case to state court, and the judge-made exceptions to this rule;
proposes a rule allowing discretionary review of remand orders.
E. Review by Writ
Reliefin the nature of habeas corpus; "all writs necessary and appropriate";
appellatesanctions.
Griffin B. Bell, The FederalAppellate Courts and the All

Writs Act, 23 Sw. L.J. 858 (1969): a good overview, written by a
then-circuit judge, who later served as Attorney General.
Bennet Feigenbaum, Interlocutory Appellate Review Via

Extraordinary Writ, 36 Wash. L. Rev. 1 (1961): an extensive
analysis of interlocutory appellate review with specific
applications.
Glenn S. Goldstein, Student Author, Federal Courts-Use

of Mandamus to Compel Adjudication of a Claim Within
Exclusive Federal Jurisdiction, 24 Vill. L. Rev. 815 (1978): a

brief comment on mandamus holding of Supreme Court.
Brian M. Hoffstadt, Common-Law Writs and Federal

Common Lawmaking on Collateral Review, 96 Nw. U. L. Rev.
1413 (2002): an Assistant U.S. Attorney analyzes courts' use of
common-law writs to allow collateral review of federal criminal
convictions; concludes that they are only properly used in the
case of the writ of coram nobis for those no longer in custody.
Charles Robert Janes, Student Author, Mandamus As a

Means of Federal Interlocutory Review, 38 Ohio St. L.J. 301
(1977): a general outline of mandamus.
Wesley Kobylak, Sanctions, in Federal Circuit Courts of

Appeals, for Failureto Comply with Rules Relating to Contents
of Briefs andAppendixes, 55 A.L.R. Fed. 521 (1981).
David M. Maria, Lauren Oland & Ian M. Schwartz, Student

Authors, Habeas Relief for State Prisoners, 88 Geo. L.J. 1649
(2000): comprehensive review of the Antiterrorism and
Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 revisions to habeas corpus
petitions and appeals brought by state prisoners.
Bruce I. McDaniel, Dismissal of Appeals Under Rule 42(b)

of Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, 42 A.L.R. Fed. 758
(1979).
Hiroshi Motomura, Immigration Law and Federal Court

Jurisdiction Through the Lens of Habeas Corpus, 91 Cornell L.
Rev. 459 (2006): examines the effects of congressional reforms
on habeas procedures.
Brent E. Newton, Applications for Certificates of

Appealability and the Supreme Court's "Obligatory"
Jurisdiction, 5 J. App. Prac. & Process 177 (2003): argues that
the Supreme Court should exercise an obligatory jurisdiction,
not a discretionary jurisdiction, to review the refusal to issue a
certificate of appealability in a habeas case.
D.R. Rimmer, Award of Costs in Appellate Proceedings in

Federal Court Under Rule 39 of Federal Rules of Appellate
A. James Roberts, III, Student Author, Mandamus

Proceedings in the Federal Courts of Appeals: A Compromise
with Finality,52 Cal. L. Rev. 1036 (1964): a general overview.
S.R. Shapiro, Mandamus, Prohibition, or Interlocutory

Appeal As Proper Remedy to Seek Review of District Court's
Disposition of Motion for Change of Venue Under § 1404(a) or
§ 1406(a) of Judicial Code, 2 A.L.R. Fed. 573 (1969); note that
this annotation has been superseded by Carolyn Kelly
McWilliam, Mandamus, Prohibition,or Interlocutory Appeal as
Proper Remedy to Seek Review of District Court's Disposition
of Motionfor Change of Venue Under § 1404(a) or § 1406(a) of
JudicialCode, 28 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 311 (2008).
Sheila A. Skojec, Finalityfor Appeal of Federal Habeas

Corpus Orders, 82 A.L.R. Fed. 937 (1987).
Elizabeth A. Snyder, Student Author, The Use of

Extraordinary Writs for InterlocutoryAppeals, 44 Tenn. L. Rev.
137 (1976): notes trend of increasing flexibility in issuance of
extraordinary writ.
Student Author, Supervisory and Advisory Mandamus

Under the All Writs Act, 86 Harv. L. Rev. 595 (1973):
distinguishes jurisdiction from standard of review.
Melissa A. Waters, Common Law Courts in an Age of

Equity Procedure: Redefining Appellate Review for the Mass
Tort Era, 80 N.C. L. Rev. 527 (2002): analyzes the use of the
writ of mandamus to review class certification decisions.
Steven Wisotsky, ExtraordinaryWrits: "Appeal "By Other

Means, 26 Am. J. Tr. Advoc. 577 (2003): a thorough discussion
of the grounds and procedures for writs in criminal and civil
cases.
F. Appeals in CriminalMatters
Criminal defendant appeals;government appeals;non-party appeals.
Marc M. Arkin, Rethinking the ConstitutionalRight to a

CriminalAppeal, 39 UCLA L. Rev. 503 (1992): re-examination
of the constitutional assumptions behind criminal appeals.
Marc M. Arkin, Speedy CriminalAppeal: A Right Without

a Remedy? 74 Minn. L. Rev. 437 (1989): explores the way other
procedures can cause undue delay but without constitutional
consequence.
Helene R. Banks, Student Author, Immediate Appeal of

PretrialCommitment Orders: "It's Now or Never", 55 Fordham
L. Rev. 785 (1987): discusses the issue of incompetency in the
criminal context and the application of the collateral order
doctrine.
Herbert B. Chermside, Jr., Dismissal of Indictment or

Information As Reviewable on Appeal by United States Under
18 USCS § 3731, As Amended by Omnibus Crime ControlAct of
1970, 30 A.L.R. Fed. 655 (1976).
Herbert B. Chermside, Jr., Review on Appeal by United

States Under 18 USCS § 3731 of Orders Suppressing or
Excluding Evidence, orfor Return of Seized Property, 34 A.L.R.
Fed. 617 (1977).
Kristin B. Gerdy, "Important" and "Irreversible" but

Maybe Not "Unreviewable ": the Dilemma of Protecting
Defendants' Rights Through the Collateral Order Doctrine, 38
U.S.F. L. Rev. 213 (2004): considers the policy of finality
against other policies in the criminal justice system at stake in
criminal appeals.
Kevin D. Hart, Failure to Appeal Denial of Double

Jeopardy Claim Within Time Limits of Rule 4, FederalRules of
Appellate Procedure,As PrecludingReview of Claim on Appeal
of Conviction at Retrial, 51 A.L.R. Fed. 770 (1981).
Vikramaditya S. Khanna, Double Jeopardy's Asymmetric

Appeal Rights: What Purpose Do They Serve? 82 B.U. L. Rev.
341 (2002): examines the different rules for allowing appeals by
the government and the defendant.
Richard J. Link, Appealability by Client of Denial of

Motion to Quash Subpoena Directed to Attorney or Order
CompellingAttorney to Testify or ProduceDocuments-Federal
Criminal Cases, 109 A.L.R. Fed. 564 (1992).
Student Author, A Test for Appealability: The Final

Judgment Rule and Closure Orders, 65 Minn. L. Rev. 1110
(1981): a well-researched consideration of the overlap between
finality and criminal trial closure orders.
Chad M. Oldfather, Appellate Courts,HistoricalFacts, and

the Civil-Criminal Distinction, 57 Vand. L. Rev. 437 (2004):
although not specifically about federal courts, this article offers
a thorough argument that appellate courts may be better finders
of some facts than the trial court in criminal cases.
Brian L. Porto, Application of Fugitive Disentitlement

Doctrine in Federal Criminal Cases, 179 A.L.R. Fed. 291
(2002).
Sydney Powell, FederalJurisdictionin CriminalAppeals-

Appealable Orders in the Fifth Circuit, 19 Tex. Tech L. Rev.
1003 (1988): a good general discussion of Supreme Court and
Fifth Circuit precedents.
Richard Sauber & Michael Waldman, Unlimited Power:

Rule 29(a) and the Unreviewability of Directed Judgments of
Acquittal, 44 Am. U. L. Rev. 433 (1994): criticizes Fed. R. Civ.
P. 29(a), which allows the trial judge to direct an unappealable
judgment of acquittal in a criminal trial; discusses the Supreme
Court's application of the double jeopardy clause to government
appeals of criminal verdicts.
Allan L. Schwartz, DirectReview by United States Court of

Appeals of Duration of Sentence Imposed by District Court in
Federal Criminal Prosecution, Where Duration Does Not

Exceed Statutorily Authorized Maximum, 21 A.L.R. Fed. 655
(1974).
Kate Stith, The Risk of Legal Error in Criminal Cases:

Some Consequences of the Asymmetry in the Right to Appeal, 57
U. Chi. L. Rev. 1 (1990): examines some of the appellate
implications resulting from different standards of proof and error
in criminal cases.
James A. Strazzella, The Relationship of Double Jeopardy

to Prosecution Appeals, 73 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1 (1997):
examines the constitutional limitations on government appeals
in criminal cases.
G. Appeals in Administrative Matters
Administrative appealsgenerally;finality; exclusivity.
Kenneth M. Anderson, Student Author, Extending the

Limits of Judicial Review of Regulatory Orders: Committee of
Consumer Services v. Public Service Commission, 1980 B.Y.U.
L. Rev. 921: discusses cases that extend limits of judicial review
of regulatory orders.
Stephen Breyer, JudicialReview of Questions of Law and

Policy, 38 Admin. L. Rev. 363 (1986): written before he became
a Justice; concludes that existing law regarding judicial review
of administrative agencies is unstable.
David P. Currie & Frank I. Goodman, Judicial Review of

Federal Administrative Action: Questfor the Optimum Forum,
75 Colum. L. Rev. 1 (1975): explores the considerations that
determine which federal administrative actions are best
reviewed by district courts or courts of appeals; argues against a
specialized administrative appeals court.
Michael A. de Freitas, Circumstances Under Which

FederalAppellate Court Will Allow FederalDeposit Insurance
Corporation (FDIC)or Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) to
Raise on Appeal Issues Not Raised at Trial Involving Financial

Institution Put in Receivership or ConservatorshipAfter Trial,
120 A.L.R. Fed. 469 (1994).
Michael A. DiSabatino, Jurisdiction of United States

Courts of Appeals to Review Agency Action Under § 9 of Bank
Holding Company Act (12 USCS § 1848), 40 A.L.R. Fed. 593
(1978).
Samuel Estreicher & Richard L. Revesz, Nonacquiescence

by FederalAdministrative Agencies, 98 Yale L.J. 679 (1989):
examines the practice of nonacquiesence, by which an agency
relitigates the same issue of federal administrative law in
succeeding courts of appeals unless and until the Supreme Court
resolves the question.
George F. Gabel, Jr., Judicial Review of Securities and

Exchange Commission Orders and Rules Under § 25 of
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.A. § 78y), 113
A.L.R. Fed. 123 (1993).
Alan R. Gilbert, Composition of Record on Review of

Agency Action Under 28 USCS § 2112(b) and Rule 16(a) of
Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, 32 A.L.R. Fed. 648
(1977).
F. Patrick Hubbard, Patterns of Judicial Review of

Administrative Decisions, 12 U. Tol. L. Rev. 37 (1980): a
philosophical approach to developing a general theory of
administrative law and judicial review.
Ernest M. Jones, A Component Approach to Minimal

Rationality Review of Agency Rulemaking, 39 Admin. L. Rev.
275 (1987): an extensive consideration of administrative
procedure; advocates component approach.
Robin C. Lamer, When Petition for Review of

Administrative Order Under 28 U.S.C. §2344 Is Timely
Commenced, 84 A.L.R. Fed. 369 (1987): discusses petitions for
review of federal administrative agencies.
Stephen H. Legomsky, Forum Choices for the Review of

Agency Adjudication: A Study of the Immigration Process, 71
Iowa L. Rev. 1297 (1986): examines administrative review and
judicial review together.
A. Leo Levin & Susan M. Leeson, Issue PreclusionAgainst

the United States Government, 70 Iowa L. Rev. 113 (1984):
explores the special problems of repetitive litigation by the
government of the United States; considers the institutional role
of the Office of the Solicitor General; examines the potential
utility of a national court of appeals or an inter-circuit tribunal.
Aaron J. Lockwood, Student Author, The Primary

Jurisdiction Doctrine: Competing Standards of Appellate
Review, 64 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 707 (2007): examines primary
jurisdiction decisions and concludes that the abuse of discretion
standard of review ought to be applied.
Abner J. Mikva, How Should the Courts Treat

Administrative Agencies? 36 Am. U. L. Rev. 1 (1986): a speech
dealing with deference for an agency's interpretations of its
organic statutes.
Carlos Ortiz Miranda, Administrative Appeals and Judicial

Review in Immigration Law: Where Matters Stand at the
Beginning of the 21st Century, 55 Cath. U. L. Rev. 917 (2006): a
thorough examination of immigration appeals in the context of
administrative law and appellate jurisdiction.
Gerald L. Neuman, Jurisdictionand the Rule of Law after

the 1996 Immigration Act, 113 Harv. L. Rev. 1963 (2000): a
discussion of reforms to immigration statutes in 1996 that
provide for direct appeal of orders to remove aliens convicted of
crimes.
David J. Oliveiri, Judicial Review of Commodity Futures

Trading Commission (CFTC) Orders Under § 6(h) of
Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C.A. § 9), 185 A.L.R. Fed. 383
(2003).
THE JOURNAL OF APPELLATE PRACnCE AND PROCESS
Brian H. Redmond, Circumstances Justifying Appellate

Review of District Court Ruling on Jeopardy or Termination
Assessment Under 26 U.S.C.A. § 7429(f), 92 A.L.R. Fed. 796
(1989).
Richard L. Revesz, Specialized Courts and the

Administrative Lawmaking System, 138 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1111
(1990): critically examines the system of generalized courts of
appeals and considers whether administrative appeals ought to
be assigned to specialized administrative courts.
Ace E. Rowley, Student Author, Administrative Inaction

and Judicial Review: The Rebuttable Presumption of
Unreviewability, 51 Mo. L. Rev. 1039 (1986): a case comment
on the Supreme Court holding that an agency's decision not to
use its enforcement powers was presumptively unreviewable.
Jean F. Rydstrom, Recall of Appellate Mandate Affirming

Order of FederalAgency, 31 A.L.R. Fed. 795 (1977).
Daniel P. Selmi, Jurisdiction to Review Agency Inaction

under the Federal Environmental Law, 72 Ind. L.J. 65 (1996):
explores the confusion arising from the designations in Clean
Water Act and Clean Air Act that bifurcate judicial review, i.e.,
courts of appeal review EPA final actions and district courts
review EPA failures to take nondiscretionary action.
Patricia M. Wald, Judicial Review of Complex

Administrative Agency Decisions, 462 Annals of the Am. Acad.
of Political and Soc. Sci. 72 (July 1982): a good overview of the
complexity and difficulty of judicial review of administrative
agencies.
Joseph F. Weis, Jr., Agency Non-Acquiescence-Respectful

Lawlessness or Legitimate Disagreement? 48 U. Pitt. L. Rev.
845 (1987): predicts that courts will increasingly find
themselves called on to resolve disputes between agencies and
citizens; discusses separation-of-powers tension.
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY - FEDERAL APPEALS 59
Elaine K. Zipp, Direct Review by Federal Courts of

Appeals ofAction by Administrator of EnvironmentalProtection
Agency Not Specifically Enumerated in §509(b)(1) of the
Federal Water Pollution ControlAct (33 U.S.C.S. § 1369(b)(1)),
Which Authorizes Direct Review of Specified Actions Taken by
the Administrator,56 A.L.R. Fed. 918 (1982).

Appellate 2719 Baker

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Appellate 2719 Baker

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Appellate 2719 Baker

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE JOURNAL OF

AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY ON FEDERAL

The materials in this bibliography are arranged by:

* This annotated bibliography is derived, with permission, from Thomas E. Baker, A

* James Wm. Moore & Daniel R. Coquillette, Moore's

Richard J. Pierce, Jr., Administrative Law Treatise (4th ed.,

Ronald D. Rotunda & John E. Nowak, Treatise on

Lea Brilmayer & Jacob Corre, An Introduction to

Robert C. Casad & William B. Richman, Jurisdiction in

Erwin Chemerinsky, Federal Jurisdiction (5th ed., Aspen

Robert M. Cover, Owen M. Fiss & Judith Resnik, The

David P. Currie, FederalCourts-Casesand Materials (4th

Donald L. Doemberg, C. Keith Wingate & Donald H.

William N. Eskridge, Jr., Philip P. Frickey, Henry Melvin

Howard P. Fink, Linda S. Mullenix & Mark V. Tushnet,

Arthur D. Hellman & Lauren K. Robel, Federal Courts:

Peter W. Low & John C. Jeffries, Jr., Federal Courts and

Robert J. Martineau, Kent Sinclair, Michael E. Solimine &

appellate practice and procedure with an emphasis on appellate

James William Moore, Moore's Federal Practice Rules

Linda S. Mullenix, Martin H. Redish & Georgene M.

John E. Nowak & Ronald D. Rotunda, ConstitutionalLaw

James E. Pfander, Principles of Federal Jurisdiction

Richard J. Pierce, Sidney A. Shapiro & Paul R. Verkuil,

Martin H. Redish, Federal Jurisdiction: Tensions in the

Martin H. Redish & Suzanna Sherry, Federal Courts,

Thomson West, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: 2008-

Laurence H. Tribe, American ConstitutionalLaw (3d ed.,

Michael L. Wells, William P. Marshall, & Larry W.

Charles Alan Wright, John B. Oakley & Debra Lyn Bassett,

III. STUDIES AND BOOKS

* Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Annual Reports

analyses; the mother lode of stats; enough to satisfy any federal

American Bar Association, Action Commission to Reduce

American Bar Association Standing Committee on Federal

American Bar Association, Judicial Administration

American Bar Foundation, Accommodating the Workload

American Law Institute, Study of the Division of

recommended that a narrowing of subject matter jurisdiction at

Carl Baar, Judgeship Creation in the Federal Courts:

Deborah J. Barrow, Gary Zuk & Gerard S. Gryski, The

Lawrence Baum, The Puzzle of Judicial Behavior (U.

Gordon Bermant, Patricia A. Lombard & Carroll Seron,

Gordon Bermant, Edward Sussman, William W. Schwarzer

* Benjamin N. Cardozo, The Nature of the JudicialProcess

Joe S. Cecil, Administration ofJustice in a Large Appellate

Joe S. Cecil & Donna Stienstra, Deciding Cases Without

Jonathan M. Cohen, Inside Appellate Courts: the Impact of

Commission on Revision of the Federal Court Appellate

Commission on Revision of the Federal Court Appellate

for Change (1975) (reprinted in 67 F.R.D. 195): the "Hruska

* Commission On Structural Alternatives for the Federal

Frank B. Cross, Decision Making in the U.S. Courts of

Department of Justice Committee on Revision of the

William Domnarski, In the Opinion of the Court (U. Ill.

Samuel Estreicher & John Sexton, Redefining the Supreme

The Federal Appellate Judiciary in the Twenty-first

* Federal Courts Study Committee, Judicial Conference of

Federal Judicial Center, Appellate Court Caseweights