MARIA GREEN, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF JOSEPH JONES, JR. (A/K/A ROSCO SIMMONS), AND NEXT OF KIN OF JOSEPH JONES, JR., PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
NORMAN CARLSON, ROBERT L. BRUTSCHE, AND BENJAMIN DE GARCIA, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS

7th Cir. | 1987-03-20
No. 86-2096
Before CUMMINGS, CUDAHY, and POSNER, Circuit Judges.
813 F.2d 863 United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (1987) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

A party is not automatically entitled to file an oversized brief simply because the opposing party was granted permission to do so.


Facts & Procedural History

The appellee requested permission to file a brief exceeding the 50-page limit, citing the appellant's 65-page brief. The request was based solely on t…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The appellee has requested our permission to file a brief in excess of 50 pages. See Fed.R.App.P. 28(g). The request states in its entirety: “since Defendants[appellants] have filed a 65 page brief, Appellee respectfully requests that she be permitted to file a 65 page brief in response.” The request is DENIED.

We write to clear up the prevalent misconception that if an appellant is granted permission to file a brief in excess of 50 pages, the appellee is entitled to file a brief of equal length. This is not correct. The appellee has the benefit of a favorable decision, and also is not required to include a statement of facts. Hence there is no presumption that he requires the same en largement of the page limitation as the appellant — or any enlargement.

Requests to file oversized briefs “are not favored, ... and will be granted only when exceptional circumstances are shown.” Practitioner’s Handbook for Appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit 47 (1986 ed.). A “me too” request such as filed in this case, with no grounds offered except the length of the opponent’s brief, will be denied.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw