Ala. R. App. P. 32

History

[Amended 8-29-89; Amended 9-6-89, eff. 3-1-90; Amended 2-5-91, ; Amended 827-91, eff. 10-1-91; Amended 11-20-2001, eff. 6-1-2002; Amended 1-12-2005, eff. 6-1-2005; Amended eff. 10-31-2005; Amended eff. 3-1-2007; Amended eff. 11-16- 2007; Amended 3-1-2010, eff. 6-1-2010; Amended 9-29-2010, eff 10-12010; Amended 5-7-2015, eff. 8-1-2015; Amended eff. 10-13-2015; Amended 724-2020, eff. 10-1-2020; Amended eff. 7-9-2021.] Committee Comments Rule 32 adopts a dual system of page sizes for briefs and appendix, when other than standard commercial printing is used. When other than standard commercial printing is utilized in preparing briefs and the appendix, this rule contemplates that briefs will be on letter-size paper and the appendix will be on legal-size paper. This is a departure from a general goal of uniformity in size, but there are adequate reasons for doing so. Letter-size briefs are simply easier to handle. The appendix must be legal-size to accommodate reproduction from the reporter’s transcript. Using the two sizes will require that non- commercially produced briefs and the appendix will be bound separately. However, separate volumes can facilitate reading the briefs while referring to the various relevant references within the appendix. The rule specifically makes allowance for copies of the reporter’s transcript simply to be inserted directly into the appendix if reproduced in accordance with this rule. Such a method will work a substantial saving in costs payable to court reporters. See the comment to Rule 10. Comment to Amendment to Rule 32(a)(3) Effective August 29, 1989 The August 29, 1989, amendment to Rule 32(a)(3) provided that the colors of briefs set out in this paragraph would be mandatory. The rule had previously provided that the colors were mandatory if the briefs were “produced by commercial printing or duplication,” but required those colors in other situations if those colors were “available.” Comment to Amendments to Rule 32(a)(2) and (b) Effective March 1, 1990 The March 1, 1990, amendments to Rule 32(a)(2) and (b) provided for a change in paper size, substituting “8½ x 11 inches” in place of “8½ x 14 inches” and substituting references to “letter-size” paper for those prior references to “legal size” paper, and changing the dimensions of typed matter in the briefs and appendices from “6½ x 12 inches” to “6½ x 9 inches.” Court Comment to Amendment Effective October 1, 1991 The amendment to Rule 32 omitted all references to the appendix system, because the use of the appendix system has been discontinued. Court Comment to Amendment to Rule 32 Effective June 1, 2002 This amendment completely rewrites former Rule 32. It specifies the reproduction quality for a brief filed in the Alabama appellate courts, abandoning the distinction between briefs produced by commercial printing and those produced by “typewriter or other process.” Briefs must now be on 8½ x 11 inch paper and the font must be Courier New 13, unless the party preparing the brief certifies that he or she does not have access to equipment capable of producing that font and that the font style used or the handwriting in the brief is the closest approximation of Courier New 13 available. That certification is to be included at the end of the brief. This amendment changes the page limitation on briefs and imposes a page limitation on other documents submitted to the court. In other than capital cases, a principal brief may not exceed 70 pages and a reply brief may not exceed 35 pages. In a capital case, the principal brief may not exceed 80 pages and a reply brief may not exceed 40 pages. These limitations apply to all portions of the brief beginning with the statement of the case, but do not include the certificate of service or any appendices or exhibits. Lower case Roman numerals must be used for numbering pages preceding the statement of the case, while subsequent pages must use Arabic numerals. In other words, the first page of the statement of the case should be page “1” of the brief. A party seeking to exceed a page limitation may file a motion with the appellate court. That motion shall show good cause for the request and shall be presented at least seven days before the day on which the brief is due. “Presented” means physically in the clerk’s office. Service of a copy of the motion on an opposing party should be at least coincident with its presentation to the clerk. Permission to exceed the page limitations of Rule 32 is reserved for the extraordinary case and will not be routinely granted. The form prescribed for briefs in Rule 32 is applicable to applications for rehearing, petitions for the writ of certiorari, petitions for an extraordinary writ, petitions for appeal by permission pursuant to Rule 5 and answers thereto, and motions and other papers seeking relief and memoranda in support of, or in opposition to, such motions or other papers. The application for rehearing shall not exceed 15 pages; a petition for a writ of certiorari shall not exceed 15 pages, except in capital cases in which event it shall not exceed 20 pages; a petition of an extraordinary writ shall not exceed 30 pages; petitions for appeal by permission pursuant to Rule 5 and answers thereto shall not exceed 20 pages; motions shall not exceed 10 pages and memoranda in support of or in opposition to motions shall not exceed 15 pages; and other papers shall not exceed 10 pages. These page limitations include all portions of the document, yet are subject to the court’s authority to grant permission to exceed the page limitation pursuant to Rule 32(a)(6)(C). The amendment allows the clerk of the appellate court to require a party to refile a noncompliant document in a form that complies with Rule 32. If a document is filed that exceeds the page limitation without the prior approval of the court, the court may, when it requires the party to refile the document, reduce the applicable page limit by as much as five pages. The amendment allows for the clerk to deem a previously filed document that fails to comply with these rules as conditionally filed, subject to the requirement that the party file, within 14 days of the date the party is notified of the noncompliance, replacement documents that do comply with these rules. Committee Comments to Amendment to Rules 32(a) and (b) Effective June 1, 2005 Subdivision (a) of this rule formerly applied only to briefs, although in practice the rule was referenced with regard to the form of all documents filed with an appellate court. The rule has been amended to indicate that subdivision (a) is applicable to all documents filed with an appellate court. Other amendments to the rule are housekeeping in nature and primarily ensure that this rule conforms with other rules being amended at this time. A sentence added to subsection (b)(3) clarifies that the answer and brief, if the Supreme Court orders such in response to a petition for writ of mandamus, shall together be no more than 30 pages. Subsections (b)(1) and (b)(2) have been amended to conform with Rule 39(d), which no longer limits the number of pages in petitions in which the petitioner is seeking certiorari review of a direct appeal in a death-penalty case. See Smith v. Jones, 256 F.3d 1135 (11th Cir. 2001), and O'Sullivan v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838 (1999). Committee Comments to Amendment to Rule 32(a)(7) Effective October 1, 2010 Subdivision (a)(7) has been amended to preclude the use of "leading," "kerning," "tracking," or any other method of adjusting the space between the lines and words of a document in an effort to circumvent the page limitations established by these rules or by order of the court. Committee Comments to Amendment to Rule 32(a)(7) Effective August 1, 2015 Rule 32(a)(7) has been amended to emphasize that the typeface of any footnotes contained within documents or briefs filed in an appellate court must also be in Courier New 13. Committee Comment to Amendment to Rule 32 Effective October 1, 2020 Rule 32 has been amended to require the use of the proportionally spaced Century Schoolbook font in 14-point type, instead of the monospaced Courier New font in 13-point type. In addition, word limits have replaced page limits, except for documents filed pro se. A page typed in Courier New 13 contains approximately 200 words. Accordingly, the page limits have been converted to word limits by multiplying the old page numbers by 200 (e.g., a 70-page limit for a brief is now a 14,000-word limit). This compares with approximately 260 words of a proportionally spaced font in 14-point type per page. Unlike Rule 32 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, which was amended in 1998 to allow the use of proportionally spaced fonts and word limits for papers submitted to the federal appellate courts, Alabama's Rule 32 does not provide for an alternative line limit for briefs and other papers because experience has shown almost all filers use the word limits and count the words with a function on their wordprocessing program. Because various Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure in addition to Rule 32 contain page limits, those rules have also been amended to replace page limits with word limits. Page limits are retained for documents filed pro se. Committee Comments to Amendment to Rule 32(a)(3)(A) and Rule 32(a)(4) Effective July 9, 2021 Rule 32(a)(3)(A) and Rule 32(a)(4) have been amended to delete the requirement to list facsimile numbers on documents filed with Alabama's appellate courts. Many attorneys no longer maintain a facsimile number. Committee Comments to Amendment to Rule 32(b)(5) Effective January 1, 2023 Rule 32(b)(5) has been amended to be consistent with Rule 27(d), which provides that a memorandum in support of or in opposition to a motion shall not exceed 3,000 words (15 pages for a memorandum filed pro se) and that a reply to a memorandum in opposition to a motion shall not exceed 1,000 words (5 pages for a reply file pro se). Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Rule 5, Rule 21(d), Rule 27(d), Rule 28, Rule 32, Rule 39(d), Rule 39(f), Rule 39(h), and Rule 40(g), effective June 1, 2002, is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from 798 So.2d. Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Rule 21(a), Rule 28, Rule 31(b), Rule 32(a) and (b), Rule 34(a), Rule 39, and Rule 40(g), effective June 1, 2005, and adopting Rule 25A, effective June 1, 2005, is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from 890 So. 2d. Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Rule 10(b), Rule 10(c), Rule 28, Rule 32(a), and Rule 32(b), and adopting Rule 39(c)(3) and the Court Comment to Rule 10(b) and Rule 10(c), effective October 31, 2005, is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from 914 So.2d. Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Rule 32(b) and Rule 41, effective March 1, 2007, is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from 949 So. 2d. Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Rule 32(b)(3) and Rule 37, Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure, amending the committee comments to the March 1, 2007, amendment to Rule 41, Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure, and adopting the Court Comment to Amendment to Rule 37 Effective November 16, 2007, all effective November 16, 2007, is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from 972 So. 2d. Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending, effective June 1, 2010, Rule 28(d)(8), Rule 32(a), and Rule 52, Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure, and adopting Rule 56 and the Court Comment to Rule 56, Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure, is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from 26 So. 3d. Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending, effective October 1, 2010, Rule 11(a)(3), Rule 25, Rule 26(a), Rule 31, and Rule 32(a)(7), rescinding Rule 11(a)(4), and adopting Rule 57, the Committee Comments to Amendment to Rule 11(a) Effective October 1, 2010, the Committee Comments to Amendment to Rule 25 Effective October 1, 2010, the Committee Comments to Amendment to Rule 26(a) Effective October 1, 2010, the Committee Comments to Amendment to Rule 31 Effective October 1, 2010, the Committee Comments to Amendment to Rule 32(a)(7) Effective October 1, 2010, and the Committee Comments to Adoption of Rule 57 Effective October 1, 2010, is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from 44 So. 3d. Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Rule 22, Rule 28(a)(5), Rule 32(a)(7), and Rule 40(f), effective August 1, 2015, and adopting the Committee Comments to those amendments to Rule 28(a)(5), Rule 32(a)(7), and Rule 40(f) is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from 160 So. 3d. Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Rule 32(b)(4), Rule 5(b), Rule 5(d), and Rule 39(e), Ala. R. App. P., effective October 13, 2015, is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from 173 So. 3d. Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Rule 5(e), Rule 21(d), Rule 27(d), Rule 28(a), Rule 28(j), Rule 28A(c), Rule 28B, Rule 32, Rule 39(d), Rule 40(f), and Rule 40(g), effective October 1, 2020, and adopting Committee Comments to those amendments is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from __ So. 3d. Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Rule 28(d)(6), Rule 32(a)(3)(A), and Rule 32(a)(4), Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure, and adopting the Committee Comments thereto, effective July 9, 2021, is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from __ So. 3d. Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Rule 27(a), Rule 27(d), and Rule 32 (b)(5), Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure, and adopting the Committee Comments thereto, effective January 1, 2023, is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from ___ So. 3d.