<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Patrick Oden &#187; appellate law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.patrickoden.com/category/appellate-law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.patrickoden.com</link>
	<description>The Common Lawyer, Now in Blog Form</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 04:36:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>New Arguments Disallowed on Appeal</title>
		<link>http://www.patrickoden.com/appellate-law/new-arguments-disallowed-on-appeal/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patrickoden.com/appellate-law/new-arguments-disallowed-on-appeal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 08:03:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Oden</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[appellate law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appellate procedure]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=110</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When you lose at trial, you may be tempted to raise any new argument you can think of on appeal. The desire to do so is natural but not permitted under the rules of appellate procedure. If you do not raise an argument at trial, then you waive that argument. Court&#8217;s summary: Civil case &#8211; [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patrickoden.com/appellate-law/new-arguments-disallowed-on-appeal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Change to Rule 111.01 Transmission of Record; Time</title>
		<link>http://www.patrickoden.com/appellate-law/change-to-rule-111-01-transmission-of-record-time/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patrickoden.com/appellate-law/change-to-rule-111-01-transmission-of-record-time/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 18:00:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Oden</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[appellate law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appellate procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rule 111.01  Transmission of Record & Time]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rules of civil appellate procedure]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=97</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Judicial district administrators have requested two changes in the method of preparing district court case records for transmission to the appellate courts to allow more streamlined and efficient practices.  The changes would:  (1) allow the use of the MNCIS Register of Actions to comply with the requirement of Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 111.01 for a numbered itemized list of all documents and exhibits contained in the record, by numbering the appropriate entries in the register of actions to correspond to numbered documents and exhibits in the record; and (2) eliminate the requirement in Rule 111.01 that the appellate court docket number be written on each document and exhibit.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patrickoden.com/appellate-law/change-to-rule-111-01-transmission-of-record-time/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
