The attorneys at BB&C litigate cases from the initial demand letter that starts a case through the appeals to the highest state and federal courts.  Appellate advocacy requires a unique skill set aside from the ability to take cases to trial.  For our clients we provide the following services:

• Appeals from trial court decisions
• Interlocutory appeals from trial court decisions
• Direct appellate actions and mandamus actions
• Petitions for Transfer and Petitions for Certiorari

We also offer appellate services to other law firms.  We offer appellate services to outside attorneys in both civil and criminal cases, with flexible arrangements that allow you to retain as much (or as little) direct responsibility as you prefer, and returning the matter to your control at its conclusion. We’ve successfully defended judgments in tort, domestic, and business-law cases, and reversed erroneous judgments in others — both in cases of first impression and in cases that refine existing law.

Good appellate advocacy requires different skills than trial litigation. First, the emotion and passion that often serve so well at trial may be inappropriate on appeal — the most effective appellate arguments are usually more measured, cool, and analytical. That change in perspective can be difficult for an attorney who has “lived and breathed” a case from its inception. Whether you plan to challenge a judgment or defend it, we can review your trial-court record objectively, and offer a realistic assessment of your position’s strengths and weaknesses.

Second, clear and concise writing comes to the forefront on appeal — especially in State-court appeals, most of which are decided on the briefs alone, without oral argument. Although appellants are permitted two briefs, they must select and frame their arguments carefully the first time, since their reply brief may not raise new arguments. And since appellees may generally file only one brief, it is their one and only opportunity to state their case and persuade the Court. As frequent appellate litigators, we have honed our skills in practice, and are confident of our ability to help your case put its best foot forward.

For both reasons, it is often wise for even the most-seasoned trial litigators to refer appeals to outside counsel who are comfortable with the appeal process, have concentrated on honing the unique appellate skill set, and who can truly be objective in evaluating the merits of an appeal. We welcome referrals from trial counsel, and are also willing to consult directly with individuals who are considering an appeal.

We provide consultation services to other lawyers for appellate matters they are handling on their own.

Representative Cases:

• Haville v. Haville, 825 N.E.2d 375 (Ind. 2005)
• Scott v. State, 924 N.E.2d 169 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), trans. denied
• Westlake v. State, 893 N.E.2d 769 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)
• Tubbs v. State, 888 N.E.2d 814 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)
• Feeney v. State, 874 N.E.2d 382 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007)
• Hollenga v. Harris, 852 N.E.2d 933 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006)
• Int’l Health & Racquet Club, Inc. v. Scott, 789 N.E.2d 62 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003)
• Madrid v. Bloomington Auto Co., 782 N.E.2d 387 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003)
• Martin v. Martin, 771 N.E.2d 650 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002)
• Quigg Trucking v. Nagy, 770 N.E.2d 408 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002)