Mere days after SCOTUS enjoins universal injunctions, judges find other way to afford “complete relief.” A big one: The Administrative Procedure Act allows courts to enjoin agency actions.

Also:

• What if a defendant does not want a co-defendant dismissed and relieved of liability? The California Supreme Court says co-defendants can oppose each other’s MSJs in R&D Contractors v. Superior Court.
• The Climategate saga continues: when 12-years of anti-SLAPP litigation does not end Dr. Michael Mann’s lawsuit defending his “hockey stick” temperature graph, the D.C. court reverses on punitive damages: with a mere $1 nominal damages award, $1M in punitives is too high. Dr. Mann’s total result after a dozen years of litigation: $6,002 (and a bill for $9,000 in discovery sanctions).
• You snooze, you pay: Employer gets sanctioned $183k for late arbitration fee payment in Guffey v. Bokeet.
• Family law FC 2030 fee denial reversed for considering improper, extra-statutory equitable factors in Marriage of Sadie v. Cativar.
• Georgia appellate court sanctions lawyer for ChatGPT-cited fake cases, citing study showing AI makes mistakes 75% of the time.
• Can you hand up exhibits during appellate argument? Maybe in Texas.
• The Third District new program delays record deadlines pending mediation.

Tune in for insights on trial prep, appeals strategy, and the increasingly blurred lines between branches of government.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• Climate Change Trial Update: Jury awards $1 plus $1M punitives for hockey-stick criticism
• Alex Anteau 'Don't Be Dumb': Ga. Court of Appeals Sanction Gives Insight...
• Law360 The Funniest Moments of The Supreme Court's Term - Law360

No more nationwide injunctions, SCOTUS says Justice Barrett writing for the 6-3 majority in Trump v. CASA. District courts must limit their injunctions to the “case or controversy” before it. Justices Sotomayor and Jackson each wrote dissents urging that more judicial power was needed to check the executive. In response, Justice Barrett says that exceeding judicial power is not the right way to address excessive executive power.

The Court did not reach the merits of the Natural Born Citizenship clause.

Also:

• The 9th Circuit seems poised to hold that anti-SLAPP motions are not appealable. This week’s en banc oral argument in Gopher Media v. Malone had many judges criticizing its precedent to the contrary.
• A lawyer calls a justice “honey” at oral argument. The internet is not forgiving.
• A party improperly recorded a trial court proceeding. While noting it is against the rules, the appellate court uses it as the record.
• How many hours does an appeal take?

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

Other items discussed in the episode:

https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/trump-v-casa-inc/

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/meganwade_i-am-very-curious-to-see-responses-here-activity-7343977603051008002-fy8B?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAACr8Z0cBB2uXy0Jklta4ZeCWMkby7fji_Xk

• Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.

Governor Newsom sued to enjoin President Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to quell the ongoing LA riots without Newsom’s consent. But first, we disclose our biases—about Trump, opportunistic political labeling of “rebellions” or “insurrections,” and how easily the thin veneer of civilization is pierced by masked cowards throwing rocks.

Also:

• Beach yoga is free speech, says the Ninth Circuit striking down San Diego’s ban.
• A study on televised oral arguments reveals that camera angles—and flags—can change the court’s perception with the public as “legitimate.”
• Lawyers must comply with the evidence code—but the court can also consider mere “information.” We discuss why appellate courts seem so cavalier about the rules of evidence.
• “Citation modified” enters the Bluebook—but Tim and Jeff agree: “cleaned up” still reigns.
• Appellate fees ≠ judgment enforcement fees.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• Is “evidence” different from “information”?
• The “(cleaned up)” origin story, with Jack Metzler
• Study on televising oral arguments and judicial legitimacy
• CALP cited in a law review about (cleaned up)! Craighead, Burke, The Bluebook: An Insider's Perspective (May 12, 2025). Michigan Law Review, Volume 124 (forthcoming 2026), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5271305 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5271305.
• Judgment enforcement fees reminder: EDWARD H. BONIN, v. LINCOLN CHAYES et al., (D2d2, May 29, 2025, No. B340106) (non-pub. opn.)
• Not enough time for the CCP 128.5 21-day date harbor? Nothing prevents asking for a continuance of the underlying motion. JUNKERS2JEWELS, LLC, et al., v. LA-DORIS MCCLANEY, (Cal. Ct. App., May 28, 2025, No. B339900) (non-pub. opn.)

The Court of International Trade—whatever that is—enjoined Trump’s tariffs. But the Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit imposed an administrative stay pending further briefing. We also cover:

• Defending a Zoom depo? If you refuse to go on camera and are accused of improper witness communication, you may be sanctioned. (Remote depos are a game-changer—woe betide the attorney who screws it up for the rest of us!)
• Case settled, but wire of settled funds intercepted by scammers. Who bears the burden depends on the circumstances—best practice is to put the wire info in the agreement itself.
• Fee awards, abuse of discretion, and dueling precedents: Cash v. County of LA vs. Snoeck v. Exactime.
• Supreme Court review granted in Maniago: Is a voluntary dismissal after a loss appealable?
• Appearing at sentencing, Tom Girardi’s pants fall down—but he still gets 87 months.
• Big Oral Argument News: Remote oral arguments are now available statewide without need to show good cause.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• Beware using the Judicial Council form dismissal

The Supreme Court faulted the district judge in A.A.R.P. v. Trump for refusing to grant the Venezuelan alleged Tren de Aragua members’ injunction. But on remand, Judge Ho comes to the judge’s defense: after all, the judge only had 42 minutes’ notice. And to conclude that the judge had had some 14 hours, Judge Ho noted, the Supreme Court must have started counting at 12:30 a.m. Last time we checked, Congress has not provisioned courts a budget to operate 24 hours. “This is a district court,” Judge Ho reminds, “not a Denny’s.”

• The Supreme Court doesn’t have appellate jurisdiction without an actual order on the injunction motion. Tim agrees with Judge Ho that the Supreme Court played a little roughshod with the otherwise fussy jurisdictional rules.
• But the Court is losing patience with the Trump Administration’s legal tactics, Jeff suspects, which is why the Court is willing to stretch past the limits on its power.

What do you think? Is the Court’s move defensible exercising power arguably beyond its jurisdiction? Does it hold faith with Marbury, which famously established judicial power by not exercising it?

We also discuss the one-sentence letdown in the high-stakes religious charter school case, Oklahoma Charter Board v. Drummond. And we share CALP alum Chris Schandevel’s appellate lessons from a hard-fought loss: how to serve your client when the Court doesn’t serve you the decision you fought for.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

SCOTUS spent two and a half hours hearing oral argument on Friday in the birthright-citizenship cases consolidated in Trump v. CASA—not about birthright citizenship, but about whether district courts should be issuing nationwide injunctions. Many justices, and commentators on both sides, have criticized nationwide injunctions as a judicial incursion into executive policymaking in both Republican and Democratic administrations. But will the Court use this case to impose limits?

We discuss:

• Plaintiffs in this case include 22 states. Absent a nationwide injunction, half the country would be under a different rule of birthright citizenship until the case resolves.
• CJ Roberts suggested that, in true emergencies, the Court can resolve a case fast, in as little as a month. Does this cut for or against nationwide injunctions?
• What does the Court think about using Rule 23 class actions as a substitute vehicle for nationwide relief?
• Are we heading toward a “guidance-free” 5–4 non-decision?

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.

Trump’s executive order targeting Perkins Coie gets bench-slapped. Jeff recites the decision’s paean to the plight of lawyers. Tim wonders if Big Law was really hanging by such a slender thread. But on the law, neither is surprised by the result in Perkins Coie v. DOJ.

Also this week:

• A motion to seal to protect privacy goes full Streisand Effect in Marin v. Rayant—filed, denied, appealed... and now, at the request of First Amendment scholar Eugene Volokh, a full published opinion.
• In Chang v. Brooks, a man loses his Wyoming guns after heatedly accusing his California neighbor of killing his cat and then getting hit with a restraining order. His SLAPP motion? Denied—without a hearing needed. Held: You’re entitled to a hearing, but it would have made no difference. Jeff & Tim ask: if Abrego-Garcia were to get a hearing, would it make a difference?
• A $10M harassment verdict is tossed after a trial judge goes off-script with bizarre commentary and irrelevant evidence in Odom v. LACCD.
• Should courts require lawyers to swear they didn’t use AI? Jeff and Tim say: bad research predates robots.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• You have a right to a hearing only if you have something worthwhile to say
• http://socal-appellate.blogspot.com/2025/04/ai-for-appellate-motions-and-more.html
• https://bsky.app/profile/rmfifthcircuit.bsky.social/post/3lmfmkodpks2z
• https://bsky.app/profile/roland.cros.by/post/3lmjyk7wejc2o

A civil litigant, hit with $200,000 sanctions for plotting the kidnapping and murder of the defendant, gets the sanctions reversed.

Next week the California Supreme Court will hear oral argument on whether the state can mandate long-term care facility employees to use residents’ preferred pronouns. If this is consistent with the First Amendment, could conservative states mandate hospitals refer to fetuses as “unborn children”?

The State Bar used AI to create bar exam questions.

An attorney used a cartoon dragon watermark in his federal filing.

And Jeff reports some tips from the recent San Francisco CLA/OCBA appellate conference.

Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.

Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.

Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.

Other items discussed in the episode:

• Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal’s YouTube channel.