Small Law Firms

Solo Practitioner Wins Unanimous Supreme Court Decision Against All Odds

Most lawyers won't even know about this decision because it involved an obscure court procedural rule.

By  
on

To be given an opportunity to argue before the U.S. Supreme Court is an honor few lawyers get. Winning is a greater honor. But winning with a unanimous decision is the ultimate honor. And this honor goes to Andrew Simpson, a solo practitioner in the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Yesterday, the high court decided Hall v. Hall. There, two cases involving a family dispute were consolidated in a federal district court. One case reached a final judgment while the other was still going through post-trial motions. The losing party, represented by Simpson, filed an appeal after the first final judgment order. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal, citing that the court lacked jurisdiction while the other case was still pending. Simpson petitioned the Supreme Court to reverse the appellate court’s decision.

The issue before the court was whether in multiple cases consolidated under Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a) the losing party has the right to appeal one judgment even though the related but separate case has not yet come to a final judgment. Simpson and his client argued that they have that right.

Initially, each party was represented by solo practitioners. But as the case progressed, Simpson had to deal with significant obstacles.

First, the petition seemed unfavorable from the start. There was a multiple-circuit split on this issue and the majority of appellate courts held against Simpson’s position. Only two circuits would have allowed a losing party to appeal after the first final judgment.

Simpson appeared to be outgunned. Simpson filed the petition on the merits on his own. Opposing counsel’s response was filed with the assistance of four attorneys from Biglaw, namely Hogan Lovells.

If that wasn’t enough, an amicus brief filed by retired federal district court judges urged the high court to rule against Simpson and his client. They argued that based on their combined experience as judges and case managers of many consolidated cases, allowing a losing party to appeal before all cases have reached final judgment would create inefficient piecemeal appeals and jeopardize judges’ ability to manage complex cases.

Sponsored

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Simpson and his client. Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the unanimous court, held that consolidated cases retain their separate identities, so that a final decision in one action is immediately appealable by the losing party, even if other actions in the consolidated proceeding remain. You can find an analysis of the decision here.

This case does not involve travel bans or the Second Amendment, so you won’t see this decision covered in the mainstream media. Most lawyers won’t even know about this decision because it involved an obscure court procedural rule. And if this decision creates chaos in the lower courts, it may be overturned in the future.

But like other aspects in life, sometimes the best David vs. Goliath stories are buried in relative obscurity. Perhaps more of these stories need to be told so lawyers won’t be afraid to take good cases, even if it seems like the odds are against them.

So congratulations to Andrew Simpson on his epic win. His arguments prevailed over a majority of appellate courts, Biglaw, and experienced federal district judges.

I hope he takes a nice long vacation at a tropical paradise.

Sponsored

Wait a minute. He practices in the Virgin Islands.

Some people just have it good.

Shannon Achimalbe was a former solo practitioner for five years before deciding to sell out and get back on the corporate ladder. Shannon can be reached by email at sachimalbe@excite.com and via Twitter: @ShanonAchimalbe.

Topics

, , ,