PacLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Supreme Court of the Federated States of Micronesia

You are here:  PacLII >> Databases >> Supreme Court of the Federated States of Micronesia >> 2000 >> [2000] FMSC 7

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

In re Sanction of Woodruff [2000] FMSC 7; 9 FSM Intrm. 374 (App. 2000) (24 April 2000)

FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA
SUPREME COURT APPELLATE DIVISION
Cite case as In re Sanction of Woodruff[2000] FMSC 7; , 9 FSM Intrm 374 (App. 2000)


IN THE MATTER OF THE SANCTION OF ATTORNEY JAMES P. WOODRUFF,
Appellant.


__________________________________________


APPEAL CASE NO. P2-2000


ORDER


Richard H. Benson
Associate Justice


Decided: April 24, 2000


APPEARANCE:


For the Appellant:
James P. Woodruff, Esq.
P.O. Box 1555
Kolonia, Pohnpei FM 96941


* * * *


HEADNOTES


Appeal and Certiorari - Briefs and Record
While it is true that in an attorney sanction appeal many items usually placed in an appendix are not relevant to the appeal, many are, such as the docket sheet or trial court's certified list, the notice of appeal, and the final order appealed from; and those items, and any other documents in the record to which the appellant wishes to draw particular attention, should be included in the appendix, but irrelevant items may be omitted. In re Sanction of Woodruff[2000] FMSC 7; , 9 FSM Intrm. 374, 375 (App. 2000).


Appeal and Certiorari
An appellant should include in the caption only those persons or entities party to the appeal. In re Sanction of Woodruff[2000] FMSC 7; , 9 FSM Intrm. 374, 375 (App. 2000).


Appeal and Certiorari; Attorney, Trial Counselor and Client - Attorney Discipline and Sanctions
An attorney may appeal a sanction, but only if proceeding under his or her own name and as real party in interest. In re Sanction of Woodruff[2000] FMSC 7; , 9 FSM Intrm. 374, 375 (App. 2000).


* * * *


COURT'S OPINION


RICHARD H. BENSON, Associate Justice:


On April 17, 2000, appellant James Woodruff filed his Motion to Dispense with Appendix. His reasoning is that many of the items typically placed in an appendix have no relevance to this appeal. The motion is denied.


While it is true that many items usually placed in an appendix are not relevant to this appeal, many are, such as the docket sheet or trial court's certified list, the notice of appeal, and the final order appealed from. Those items, and any other documents in the record to which the appellant wishes to draw particular attention to, shall be included in the appendix. The appellant may omit such items that are typically in an appendix that he deems irrelevant to this appeal.


In future filings, the appellant shall include in the caption only those persons or entities party to this appeal. See In re Sanction of Michelsen[1997] FMSC 23; , 8 FSM Intrm. 108, 110 (App. 1997) (sanctioned attorney appeals under his own name and as real party in interest); In re Sanction of Berman[1996] FMSC 16; , 7 FSM Intrm. 654, 656 (App. 1996) (sanctioned attorney may appeal but only if she proceeds under her own name and as real party in interest).


PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/fm/cases/FMSC/2000/7.html