Appreciating Mandatory Rules: A Reply to Critics

Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy, Vol. 102, p. 228, 2008

11 Pages Posted: 26 Feb 2008 Last revised: 12 Nov 2012

Scott Dodson

University of California Hastings College of the Law

Abstract

In Bowles v. Russell, the Court held that the statutory time limitation for filing a notice of appeal is jurisdictional. In a short essay published in Northwestern University Law Review's Colloquy, I critiqued that decision, suggested a better approach, and previewed some of the difficulties that the decision may cause for the future. Professors Perry Dane and Beth Burch and Mr. King Poor, Esq. responded. This short reply to their responses develops additional reasons for characterizing the time to file a notice of appeal as mandatory but nonjurisdictional.

Keywords: Bowles, Colloquy, Poor, Dane, Burch, time to appeal, notice of appeal, jurisdictionality, mandatory

Suggested Citation

Dodson, Scott, Appreciating Mandatory Rules: A Reply to Critics. Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy, Vol. 102, p. 228, 2008. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1097641

Scott Dodson (Contact Author)

University of California Hastings College of the Law ( email )

200 McAllister Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
United States
415-581-8959 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://https://www.uchastings.edu/faculty-administration/faculty/dodson/index.html

Paper statistics

Downloads
61
Rank
293,168
Abstract Views
701