From Ballotpedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Judgepedia:WikiProject Terms and Definitions


Appellate jurisdiction is the power of a college court to hear appeals from a lower courtroom. The higher court can review decisions and modify outcomes of the decisions of lower courts. In the federal judiciary, the circuit courts accept appellate jurisdiction over the commune courts and the supreme court has appellate jurisdiction over the circuit courts. With appellate jurisdiction, most higher courts just review the lower courtroom's decision to see if whatsoever errors were made when information technology comes to applying the law.[1] [2]

Construction of the Us appellate courts

The Supreme Courtroom of the United States decides cases almost exclusively nether its appellate jurisdiction. It can review nigh decisions of federal courts equally well as the decisions of country courts involving questions of constitutionality or statutory constabulary.[three] Appellate jurisdiction is addressed in reference to the Supreme Courtroom in Article 3, Department 2 of the Us Constitution.[4] Although the Supreme Court only exercises appellate jurisdiction over decisions of other courts, some U.S. courts may too review the decisions of non-judicial tribunals, such equally administrative agencies.[3]

Below the Supreme Court are the twelve Excursion Courts of Entreatment. These courts hear appeals from the district courts within their region. In full, at that place are 94 federal judicial districts spread across the land.[5]

Standards of appellate review

  • Sufficiency of the bear witness

This review requires the appellate courtroom to determine if the show presented at trial supports the weight of the verdict. If the lower courtroom's ruling was in favor of the plaintiff, the higher court looks at whether the evidence, if viewed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, would persuade an average person the plaintiff had proven his or her case by a preponderance of the testify in civil cases. The higher courtroom does not re-counterbalance the evidence presented or attempt to gauge the credibility of witnesses; instead, information technology accepts the trial court'south findings and affirms if the sum of those findings meets the necessary threshold.[6]

  • Abuse of discretion

Here, the higher court is reviewing the decisions of the trial courtroom gauge during the case to determine if he or she acted unreasonably or in an arbitrary fashion. Many types of trial court decisions are reviewed under the abuse of discretion standard, including the trial judge's decision to award or deny attorney fees in a case.[half dozen]

  • Plain error

Plain error means what the name implies: the trial court acted in a manner that, on its face, was in mistake. The higher courtroom will review errors that were not objected to at trial but only if these errors were unjust or unfair. This review is usually applied in exceptional circumstances when one party has been extremely prejudiced by an obvious error. It will not exist applied, though, when there is a significant weight of prove supporting the judgment.[half dozen]

  • Harmless error

A harmless error is ane that does not modify the outcome of the case. If it is harmless, the higher courtroom will assert the lower court'southward judgment.[6]

  • De novo

"De novo" is a Latin term significant afresh or beginning once more. When a college courtroom applies this standard, information technology is reviewing the lower court's awarding, interpretation, or construction of the police.[half dozen] In essence, the appellate court is viewing the case as if non legal decision had been fabricated previously. The trial court'southward findings of fact, however, are not disturbed.[7]

  • Conspicuously erroneous

This standard is used when the appealing political party disputes the trial court'southward findings of fact. Considering the trial courtroom is in a special position to judge the credibility of witnesses who appear before it when it makes its findings, the appellate court gives "special deference" to those findings and, unless they are plain mistaken or incorrect, those findings will not exist overturned.[7]

Ballotpedia:Index of Terms

See also

  • Appellate
  • Appellate Courtroom
  • Appellate review

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Cornell Academy Law School: Wex Legal Dictionary and Encyclopedia, accessed Baronial twenty, 2013
  2. ↑ U.s. Legal: Appellate Jurisdiction Law & Legal Definition, accessed August twenty, 2013
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.i U.S. Courts: "About the Supreme Courtroom," accessed January 17, 2015
  4. ↑ Heritage Guide to the Constitution: "Appellate Jurisdiction Clause," accessed January 17, 2015
  5. ↑ U.South. Courts: "Federal Courts' Structure," accessed Feb 17, 2015
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.ii 6.3 vi.iv Lawyers: "Standards of Review," accessed January 17, 2015
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.one Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals: "Standards of Review," accessed January 17, 2015