We’ve previously commented about CAAF’s anorexic docket this term. (See, e.g., here.) If I compute correctly, CAAF’s current number of 2009 Term decisions of the court (16) plus argued-but-yet-to-be-announced cases (13) plus scheduled-but-yet-to-be-argued cases (6) plus granted-but-not-yet-scheduled cases (7) equals 42.

Today it occurred to me to wonder what the realistic cutoff date is for a case to be granted, argued, and decided this term. The final oral argument sittings of the term are scheduled for 5 and 6 May. Assuming that, realistically, a reply brief would have to be filed no later than Friday, 1 May for a case to be heard on one of those dates, then a case would have to be granted no later than Wednesday, 18 February to be briefed under the normal briefing schedule and ready for oral argument this term. (If a case were granted on Thursday, 19 February, the normal briefing schedule wouldn’t run until Monday, 4 May — just one or two days before the final scheduled sittings of the term.)

CAAF could add oral argument dates later in May to expand this term’s docket somewhat. But absent such a change, the total number of opinions of the court this term is likely to be limited to 42 plus the number of cases granted or certified in the 14 days extending from today through 18 February.

One Response to “A thought about CAAF’s docket”

  1. Cloudesley Shovell says:

    I’m thinking about the various Art. 62 appeals pending out there, particularly the Art. 120 ones. NMCCA is taking its time, and given that CAAF decided it has jurisdiction over Art. 62 issues, any decision is sure to be appealed to CAAF. At this pace, these issues won’t be decided for another year.

    A 12-15 month delay on interlocutory proceedings is not appropriate. This stuff should be able to make its way through the appellate courts in no more than 90-120 days.