Adams v. Hebert

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that there was nothing to prevent the timely filing of the transcript since the appellant's counsel had the transcript in his possession at the time he filed the notice of appeal
• concluding that there was nothing to prevent the timely filing of the transcript since the appellant’s counsel had the transcript in his possession at the time he filed the notice of appeal
• concluding that 150-day delay resulted in delayed docketing from one term to another
• concluding that 150-day delay resulted in delayed docketing from one term to another
• concluding that 150-day delay resulted in delayed docketing from one term to another
• delay in filing transcript was unreasonable, where appellant waited more than 150 days to file it, thereby “preventing] the placement of the case on the earliest possible appellate court calendar” and causing “the docketing and consideration of the appeal [to be] delayed for another term”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).