The Purposes of Appeal

Why do appellate courts exist, and why are dissatisfied litigants permitted to appeal? Two general purposes can be identified. First, appellate courts exist to correct errors in the application of the law to individual litigants and thus to serve justice. Because individual judges and juries can error, some kind of review of their judgments seems necessary so litigants do not suffer injustice because of their mistakes. Appellate courts serve this function.

Furthermore, appellate courts enjoy some advantages in reaching the right result under the law; they often possess more information, and they can operate at a more deliberate pace, A trial judge may make a procedural ruling with little time for consideration or study in the emotional and chaotic conditions of a trial. An appellate court has the luxury of considering that ruling on the basis of extensive written briefs and oral arguments and with weeks or months to make a judgment. Also, appellate decisions are made by multiple judges rather than a single one, a structure that should reduce the chance for an erroneous decision.

Second, appellate courts help to make the law clear and consistent with their decisions. Clarity and consistency are important because they allow people and their attorneys to be more certain of the legal consequences of their actions whether a contract will be declared valid if it is challenged, whether a corporate merger might be disapproved under the antitrust laws. Clarity and consistency also serve the goal of equal justice by helping to ensure that the law will be applied in the same way in different cases.

One way that appellate courts can reduce ambiguity and inconsistency is by resolving conflicting interpretations of the law. If federal district judges in the Sixth Circuit produce different interpretations of the federal sentencing laws, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals can adopt a single interpretation for them to follow. Even in the absence of a conflict, an appellate court can correct what its members see as a mistaken interpretation of a legal provision by a lower court. This kind of correction, like the correction of the way that the law is applied to a specific case, allows appellate courts to supervise trial courts and keep them on what appellate judges see as the right path.

To some degree, there is a division of labor between first-level and second-level courts in serving these purposes. In systems with two tiers of appellate courts, the courts of appeals do most of the work of correcting perceived errors in trial court decisions, leaving the supreme court to concentrate on developing and clarifying the law.

4074 symbols

Не знайшли потрібну інформацію? Скористайтесь пошуком google:

Генерація сторінки за: 0.004 сек.