Thetrialiswherefactsarefound.Theappealiswherelawismade.
Q01
Did I Lose for Good?
A trial verdict is not the end of the legal road. It is the end of the fact-finding stage — and the beginning of the law-review stage. Appellate courts do not retry cases. They examine whether the trial court applied the law correctly, admitted evidence it should have excluded, gave instructions that misstated the governing rule, or permitted a verdict no reasonable jury could reach on the evidence presented.
Reversible error is more common than trial lawyers expect, because trial judges operate under pressure, pace, and imperfect recollection of every evidentiary ruling they made in the prior three weeks. The transcript is where the errors live. Our first task — before we discuss fees or strategy — is to read every page of it.
"An error is reversible when there is a reasonable probability that, but for the error, the result of the proceeding would have been different."Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (1967) — Harmless Error Standard
$14.2M Verdict Reversed
Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · Commercial Litigation
The trial court admitted a damages expert whose methodology failed Daubert scrutiny. The error was preserved by a single motion in limine that the trial lawyer had filed and the court denied. We briefed the issue, the Fifth Circuit reversed in full, and the case settled at remand for a fraction of the original verdict.
Q02
What Are My Deadlines?
Appellate deadlines are jurisdictional. Miss the notice of appeal deadline and no court can help you — not on equitable grounds, not on the merits, not ever. The clock starts running the moment final judgment is entered, not the moment you decide to appeal.
In federal civil cases, you have 30 days. In most federal criminal cases, 14 days. Some states give you 30 days. Some give you 15. If a post-trial motion is pending, the deadline may be tolled — but only if the motion is the right kind, filed correctly, within the required time. This is not the area for approximation.
"The timely filing of a notice of appeal is a mandatory precondition to appellate jurisdiction."Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205 (2007)Request a Case Evaluation
Common Appellate Deadlines — Quick Reference
Federal Circuit Courts
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A)
30 days
14 days (Govt: 30)
State Appellate (most jurisdictions)
Varies by state
30 days
30 days
Notice of Appeal Extension
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)
Up to 30 additional days
Excusable neglect only
Opening Brief (Federal)
Fed. R. App. P. 31(a)(1)
40 days after record filed
40 days after record filed
Petition for Cert. (SCOTUS)
Sup. Ct. R. 13
90 days from judgment
90 days from judgment
Deadlines vary by jurisdiction and case type. This table is illustrative, not legal advice. Contact us immediately to confirm the deadline in your matter.
Q03
How Is This Different from Trial?
Trial lawyers are exceptional at trial. Appellate work requires a different skill set entirely — one built around statutory construction, circuit-split analysis, and the disciplined art of identifying which of the forty errors in a record is the one most likely to move an appellate panel.
We do not retry the case. We read the transcript the way a radiologist reads a scan — looking for the specific anomaly that, once named, makes everything else make sense. Then we write the brief that makes the court see what we see.
"Questions of law are reviewed de novo. We owe no deference to the district court's legal conclusions."Standard of Review — Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal
Trial
Primary Task
Persuade twelve strangers on facts
New Evidence
Introduced through witnesses and exhibits
Key Document
Trial brief, jury instructions, exhibits
Oral Argument
Opening statement, closing argument
Standard of Review
No standard — you are the first decision
Winning Move
Credibility, narrative, emotion
Appeal
Primary Task
Persuade three judges on law
New Evidence
None. The record is closed.
Key Document
The transcript. Every word of it.
Oral Argument
10–20 minutes. Judges interrupt. Preparation is everything.
Standard of Review
De novo, abuse of discretion, or clear error — each changes strategy
Winning Move
Identifying the legal error the trial court committed
Q04
What Will It Cost?
We do not bill appellate work by the hour. Hourly billing in appellate practice creates the wrong incentives — it rewards length over precision, and it leaves clients unable to plan. Every matter we handle is priced on a flat-fee basis, agreed before the first word of the brief is written.
The evaluation is the starting point. For a fixed fee, we tell you whether you have a viable appeal, what the strongest issues are, and what the realistic range of outcomes looks like. If we do not find reversible error, we tell you that too — and save you the cost of a brief that cannot win.
"The strength of an appellate position is determined before the brief is written, not after."Appellate Practice PrincipleRequest a Case Evaluation
Flat fee
Case Evaluation
We read the transcript, identify preserved error, and deliver a written assessment of appellate viability. No open-ended hourly engagement. One document. One decision.
Flat fee or hybrid
Opening Brief
A fixed fee for the opening brief, agreed before we begin. Scope is defined by the issues identified in the evaluation. No surprise invoices.
Flat fee
Full Appellate Representation
Notice of appeal through oral argument. One agreed number, covering all attorney time, research, and court appearances. We share the risk of the outcome.
Q05
Read Our Recent Wins
Commercial Contract Dispute
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Improper Exclusion of Expert Testimony
The district court excluded plaintiff's damages expert under Rule 702 without conducting a full Daubert hearing. We argued the exclusion was an abuse of discretion and that the error was not harmless given the centrality of the testimony to the damages case. The Ninth Circuit agreed, reversed, and remanded for new trial on damages.
Federal Criminal Appeal
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Brady Violation — Undisclosed Informant Agreement
Post-conviction review of the trial record revealed a cooperation agreement between the government's key witness and federal prosecutors that was never disclosed to defense counsel. We briefed the Brady issue, supplemented the record on appeal, and obtained a full vacation of the conviction and remand for new trial.
Employment Discrimination
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
De Novo Review Reveals Genuine Dispute of Material Fact
The district court granted summary judgment on a Title VII retaliation claim, finding no adverse employment action. On de novo review, we demonstrated that the district court applied the wrong legal standard and that the record contained direct evidence of retaliatory intent. The Fifth Circuit reversed and remanded for trial.
The next step
We have already read cases like yours.
The question is whether we find the error.
The evaluation is a flat-fee engagement. We read the record, identify the preserved issues, and deliver a written assessment of your appellate position. You leave with a clear answer — not a pitch.
Request a Case Evaluation