Understanding the Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure
What is the Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure?
In the event that an individual or entity has been the recipient of a judgment or ruling within a judicial setting, they are entitled to appeal the decision mandated by that legal institution. However, a dispute with regard to that ruling exists on the part of that individual – and subsequent to the receipt of this ruling – must satisfy a variety of applicable statutes and procedures required by the appellate jurisdictional body; the procedure undertaken with regard to a nation or country is defined as a Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure.
A Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure provides for both the ideology and methodology applicable to the administration of an appellate hearing. Typically, the Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure will exist in conjunction with the legal system undertaken by that individual country or nation; this results in the legislative statues applicable to the respective Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure to be set forth within legal statutes – the legal statutes accompanying a specific Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure will also vary in accordance to the judicial review process.
Evidence-based Appellate Procedure
Within the setting of an Appellate Court – with regard to its respective jurisdiction and location, a variety of procedures may be employed with regard to an appellate hearing:
Certain jurisdictions, which may include Common Law and Socialist Law, allow for a ‘Do Novo’ method of judicial review; this authorizes the case to be heard in its entirety, which includes the introduction of new evidence and information
Other jurisdictions, which typically include Civil Law, will disallow for the judicial review of any or all information and evidence not submitted within the venue of the original hearing
The Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Petition Process
Due to the fact that the Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure will typically vary in accordance the varying legal systems undertaken by individual countries or nations, the appellate process with regard to the approval of an appeals hearing will vary, as well.
On an international level, there currently exist a multitude of legal systems employed by a host of countries and nations; however, amongst the most common are Common Law Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure, Civil Law Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure, and Socialist Law Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure – each of these individual Federal Rule of Appellate Procedures differ in both the petition process, as well as the administration process:
Common Law Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure
Within a Common Law nation, applicants desiring the enactment of Appellate hearings will be required to adhere to the imposed legislative hierarchy imposed by the individual governing body; then hierarchy typically ranges from ‘lower courts’ to ‘Federal Court’
Common Law Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure requires that each of the venues within an individual hierarchy system undertake an approved appellate hearing prior to a final hearing, which takes place at the Federal level
Civil Law Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure
With regard to legal hierarchy, a divergence exists within countries and nations undertaking a legal ideology rooted in Civil Law; while certain Civil Law Federal Rule of Appellate Procedures require that individual applicants adhere to the imposed legal hierarchy, other Civil Law Federal Rule of Appellate Procedures allow for applicants to apply directly for an appellate hearing on a federal level
Socialist Law Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure
Countries and nations employing a legal methodology rooted within Socialist Law will typically provide individual applicants with a wide variety of Appellate courts specific to the circumstances latent within the case details; for instance, criminal appeals will be heard before a Criminal Court of Appeals, while a custody hearing might be heard before a Family court of Appeals
NEXT: What Does a Federal Appellate Court Do?
