Episode Player
9th Circuit overrules the appeal-extension rule: 30 Days Means 30 Days
The California Appellate Law Podcast
Chapters
0:00
Introduction
0:54
Understanding the McNeil Case and Appeal Deadlines
8:56
California's Appeal Process and Rule 58
12:55
Recent Developments in Anti-SLAPP Motions
17:09
The Shift from Res Judicata to Claim Preclusion
19:02
Sanctions in Federal Court: A Cautionary Tale
21:26
The Role of AI in Legal Research
27:08
The Future of Legal Work with AI
31:00
Outro
The California Appellate Law Podcast
9th Circuit overrules the appeal-extension rule: 30 Days Means 30 Days
Sep 17, 2025
Episode 182
Tim Kowal & Jeff Lewis
Appealing in the 9th Circuit? Your deadline is 30 days. Don’t let Rule 58’s “separate document” extension lead you astray. Appellate specialists Tim Kowal and Jeff Lewis also discuss ChatGPT 5 (a “market disruptor”), and sanctions strategies in federal court.
- Appeal Deadline Alert: The 9th Circuit in McNeil v. Guitare held that Rule 58's 150-day extension for appeal deadlines applies only to final judgments, not collateral orders like qualified immunity denials.
- Anti-SLAPP Motion Timing: Mora v. Menjivar confirms that filing just a notice of anti-SLAPP motion within the 60-day deadline is insufficient—supporting documents must be filed concurrently.
- Out: Res Judicata. In: Claim Preclusion.
- Sanctions Strategy: 28 U.S.C. § 1927 can be used for sanctions without Rule 11's cumbersome 21-day safe harbor.
- AI Ethics: California courts confirmed in Nolan v. Land of the Free that attorneys must personally read all cited authorities, regardless of whether AI tools were used in brief preparation.
And more practical insights on navigating procedural pitfalls, avoiding sanctions, and ethically incorporating AI tools into your appellate practice.
