logo

317.636.6481

One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

Make a Payment
logo
CONTACT US
CALL US
  • Home
  • Firm Overview
  • Our Attorneys
  • Practice Areas
    • Pharmaceutical Drug & Medical Device Litigation
    • Personal Injury
    • Sexual Abuse
    • Class Action
    • Medical Malpractice
    • Eminent Domain
    • Family Law
    • Business Services, Real Estate & Business Litigation
    • Bankruptcy, Creditor’s Rights, & Commercial & Business Law
    • Appellate Law
  • Firm News
    • News & Announcements
    • Alerts
  • Resources
    • Video Library
    • Blog
  • Contact Us

317.636.6481

One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

Make a Payment
  • Home
  • Firm Overview
  • Our Attorneys
  • Practice Areas
    • Pharmaceutical Drug & Medical Device Litigation
    • Personal Injury
    • Sexual Abuse
    • Class Action
    • Medical Malpractice
    • Eminent Domain
    • Family Law
    • Business Services, Real Estate & Business Litigation
    • Bankruptcy, Creditor’s Rights, & Commercial & Business Law
    • Appellate Law
  • Firm News
    • News & Announcements
    • Alerts
  • Resources
    • Video Library
    • Blog
  • Contact Us

Home » Blog » The Indiana Appellate Rules Do Not Allow Exhibits in the Appendix or Citations in Footnotes

The Indiana Appellate Rules Do Not Allow Exhibits in the Appendix or Citations in Footnotes

By: Arend J. Abel, Attorney

[November 17, 2016]– The Indiana Court of Appeals issued an opinion today in which it said Exhibits should not be put in the Appendix.  Sperro, LLC v. Ford Motor Credit Company, LLC.  In footnote 4 of the opinion, the Court said:

“Appellants’ and FMCC’s appendices do not comply with the Indiana Rules of Appellate Procedure because they contain exhibits, which are considered part of the transcript and therefore are not to be reproduced in an appendix pursuant to Appellant Rules 29 and 50(F).”

While  Rule 50(F) does say that “parties should not reproduce any portion of the Transcript in the Appendix,” Rule 29 actually contains language suggesting that exhibits may be something different from the transcript.  But, Rule 2(K), which the Court does not cite, defines the term “Transcript” as including “the transcript . . . and any exhibits associated therewith.”  So, the Court of Appeals was right, it just didn’t provide the right rule citation.

In the same footnote, the Court again said that Bryan Garner’s convention of putting all case citations in footnotes does not comply with the rules.  Now, this doesn’t mean that a footnote containing argument or explanation can’t contain the citations that support the argument or explanation.

But my very strong view is that if something is worth saying, it is worth putting in the text.  Now that all courts use word limits, rather than page limits, putting things in footnotes is irrelevant to coming within the limits.  I always try to keep in mind what Noël Coward said on the subject.

 

One Indiana Square Suite 1400
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

Copyright ©  Cohen & Malad, LLP. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer  |  Privacy Policy

 

Schedule a free consultation Today
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Schedule a free consultation Today

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

ALERTS

Data Breach Exposes Patient Information at Greater Cincinnati Pathologists, Inc.

Greater Cincinnati Pathologists, Inc. announced cyber thieves hacked its patient database and accessed protected health information of .. [Read More]

SEE ALL ALERTS

In the News

Best Lawyers® Names Cohen & Malad, LLP to 2020 Best Law Firms List Elizabeth M. Hyde Joins Class Action Practice at Cohen & Malad, LLP Shaunestte N. Terrell Joins Personal Injury Practice Sexual Abuse Litigation Team at Cohen & Malad, LLP
READ OUR NEWS