PRACTICE AREAS

Appeals

Can you describe generally about the appeal services your office provides?

We have represented clients and provided appeal services at the following courts and organizations: The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals; the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals; the Supreme Court of the United States of America; the Federal Circuit Court for the District of Columbia; the District of Columbia Court of Appeals: the State of Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation; the Merit System's Protection Board; the Office of Federal Operations; the Merit System Board for the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission; State of Maryland, Office of the Attorney General, Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; and the Government of the District of Columbia Department of Health Board of Nursing.

Many of our appeal cases came from clients who either previously represented themselves or had attorneys that for whatever reason didn't rise to the satisfaction level of the client. We have handled a wide range of appellate issues including will contests, licensing reinstatement, wrongful termination and procedural due process violations. Our clients have been quite satisfied with the level of attention and detail we put into every appeal we do. Our firm also handles all aspects of the appeal from drafting the Appellate brief to arguing the appeal before a panel of Judges.

Take me through the appeal process as the firm would generally handle it.

The initial consultation is a little bit different for an appeal case that it is for a case that has yet to be litigated. We focus upon what already occurred in the litigation and get a general sense for the reasons the litigation was brought. Most importantly, we track all deadlines for the Appellate Court to provide you with a time frame for the case. After meeting the client and getting the feel for the case, we will then in all likelihood secure your entire file, in many case's from your previous attorney's office. We review the file and in particular the court's or organization's decision as well as any argument briefs filed both on your behalf and by your adversary. We may research case law or statutes to determine whether the decision maker applied the law correctly or whether all of the meritorious arguments were raised on your behalf.

Following that review, we discuss the case's merits with you and our belief as to the reasons the case may or may not be worth appealing. You will be provided with a written comprehensive analysis as to our professional opinion on the case and the merits of appeal.

Assuming we are in agreement to go forward with the appeal, we research and apply the most pertinent case law and legal arguments that we will present on your behalf. Most appeal courts require the drafting of an appeal brief, a legal document that can range from ten to thirty five pages listing the critical facts in the case, the legal arguments and the erroneous legal analysis that was articulated by the lower court. Courts generally have special rules for the formatting of these briefs. The Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal for example require a table of contents; a question presented section; a statement of the case section and other technical arrangements. If these requirements are not honored, the courts can reject your brief. Generally speaking, the Appellate Courts require that the appellant, the person appealing, hand in with a brief something known as an "appendix" which is a copy of all important documents that the lower court reviewed that we believe the Appellate court should study before rendering a decision.

Once we file our brief, your adversary will have a certain deadline to file his or her brief. We will then have an opportunity to submit a reply brief to the adversary's opposition. This concludes the written portion of the appeal.

Many times Appellate courts ask for oral argument on the case, to clarify certain points of argument between the parties. This generally involves standing before a panel of Judges and answering questions about the appeal, while simultaneously persuading the decision makers as to the reasons your appeal should prevail. Depending on the court, each side will usually be allowed anywhere from ten to thirty minutes to argue its case.

What are the qualities necessary for a proficient appeals' lawyer?

In short, you have to be vigorous about the law and commit to aggressively researching all legal angles that may help your client. You then have to be very sharp at legal application and have the ability to understand how the law and facts work in a particular case and how the lower court Judge misapplied it. Excellent written skills in drafting legal argument are necessary to make them cogent and understandable to the Appellate Court. Finally, regarding oral arguments, you have to exercise excellent judgment as to which are the client's best arguments and making sure that you are able to prioritize those arguments with respect to the time constraints that the Courts establish. For example, in a wrongful termination M.S.P.B. case, if your best argument is that termination was too harsh a discipline for the conduct committed, you better make sure that most of your oral argument time is devoted to that issue. Total mastery of the case is crucial. The questions from the Appeals Courts generally come at very high speeds and you have to have done your homework in anticipating what those questions will likely be prior to setting foot in an appeals court.

Can you tell me about some appeals cases that your office has won?

We'd absolutely be proud to share some of our results. Here are three cases involving different legal arguments.

We successfully appealed to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Office of Federal Operations (OFO) and obtained a reversal of the Summary Judgment decision issued by Lead Administrative Law Judge for the EEOC's Birmingham District Office, Clarence Bell. In the case Shay A. Hitchcock v. Department of Homeland Security, Appeal No. 0120051461, the OFO found that the Judge had improperly found for the Department of Homeland Security on Summary Judgment.

Our client, Mr. Shay Hitchcock was wrongfully terminated when he was falsely accused of improper sexual conduct toward a Delta employee. As a result, Mr. Hitchcock then became a victim of sexual harassment and a hostile work environment, when he refused to publicly apologize to the employee at the Golden Triangle Airport, in Columbus, Mississippi. Click here to read the decision.

On January 25, 2007, the Washington, D.C., Court of Appeals reversed the lower Washington, D.C. court, and helped settle several critical legal questions involving an inheritor's right to receive a will inheritance, and then contest the validity of the same will. The case, in Re, Estate of Barbara Davis, No. 05-PR-1475, involved a will contest, in which the Appellant, our client, Gary Davis, contended that the will from which he ultimately received an inheritance was invalid due to undue influence over the testator. Mr. Davis later accepted his inheritance under the will, while still challenging it. The adversary claimed that Mr. Davis had forfeited his right to contest the will.

Morris E. Fischer, argued the appeal on behalf of Mr. Davis and successfully argued that since no party was unduly prejudiced, meaning that no party suffered an irretrievable loss by Mr. Davis accepting monies under the will, the Appellant should have nonetheless had the right to contest it. The case involved the analysis of certain legal precedents, some over a hundred years old and the Court's decision helped provide clarity on this issue of law.

The Court also reversed the trial court that dismissed the case because Mr. Davis, who at the time had no lawyer and was unaware of a scheduling conference, missed it. Mr. Fischer argued that in truth, the Court had failed to send notice to Mr. Davis' correct address and as such, Mr. Davis had valid reasons for missing his conference. Following the dismissal, Mr. Davis retained Morris E. Fischer, Attorney at Law to argue the appeal. To read the decision, click here. This is an excellent example of a client who was dissatisfied with his prior attorney and retained our office for the appeal. We were able to prevail on this appeal despite the errors made by his prior lawyer.

In Texeira v. United States Postal Serv., 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 4335 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 28, 2008), we successfully appealed against the United States Postal Service in an M.S.P.B. decision which struck down a disciplinary decision against a U.S. Postal Service employee that had stripped her of management responsibility and demoted her to a part-time, entry level clerical position. The Court found that under the factors enumerated in Douglas v. Veterans Admin., 5 M.S.P.R. 280 (1981), this discipline far exceeded the only proven charge of Failure to Follow Proper Timekeeping Procedures. The firm would like to thank Ms. Judy Texeira, our client, of Modesto, California for entrusting and retaining our office for this appeal. Morris E. Fischer, Esq., drafted the appeal documents and orally argued the case at the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. To read the decision, click here. This was anther case we handled in which there had been a previous attorney who litigated the underlying claim.

Despite the shape that my case is in can your firm really help me?

The nature of this kind of work is to help people who have cases which may be in less than ideal condition. Whether we can help you on your particular case depends upon a review of your file. Our office has helped all kinds of people and if you read our testimonial page, we think you'll find a lot of satisfied clients. Contact our office today for your free initial consultation.