Miss. R. App. P. 29
Advisory Committee Historical Note
Effective June 27, 2002, Rule 29(c) was amended to provide that a party has 7 days to file a response in opposition to a motion to file an amicus curiae brief. 822-823 So.2d XIX (West Miss.Cases 2002).
Effective January 1, 1995, Miss.R.App.P. 29 replaced Miss.Sup.Ct.R. 29, embracing proceedings in the Court of Appeals. 644-647 So.2d LXVII-LXIX (West Miss.Cases 1994).
Effective July 1, 1994, the Comment to Miss.Sup.Ct.R. 29 was amended to effect technical changes. 632-635 So.2d LII (West Miss.Cases 1994).
[Adopted August 21, 1996.]
Comment
Rule 29 is patterned on Fed. R. App. P. 29, 5 th Cir. R. Rule 31.2, Ala. R. App. P. 29, U.S. Sup. Ct. R. 36, and the former rules of the Mississippi Supreme Court.
Briefs of an amicus curiae are allowed under this rule consistent with the accepted view that such briefs, in appropriate cases, are of genuine assistance to the court and facilitate a more thorough understanding of the facts and law. Taylor v. Roberts, 475 So. 2d 150 (Miss. 1985). Under this rule, any person may move for leave to file an amicus brief. The appropriate court will consider motions filed under this rule pursuant to the considerations set out in subdivision (a). The State of Mississippi, through the Attorney General, however, need not obtain permission of the Court to appear as an amicus curiae. The court may also invite amicus briefs from persons the Court perceives may be affected by the outcome of the case. See Warren County v. Culkin, 497 So. 2d 433, 435-36 (Miss. 1986).
The rule follows federal practice by integrating amicus curiae briefs into the schedule for filing briefs on the merits. The motion with attached amicus brief need not be filed, however, until seven days after the initial brief of the party whose position the amicus brief will support. This delay permits the amicus to take advantage of Rule 28(j) and adopt by reference portions of the brief of that party. It also ensures the amicus will know what the party's brief contains. It is designed to discourage the filing of repetitive briefs that cannot satisfy Rule 29(a).
The opposing party may choose not to oppose the motion and may respond to the amicus brief in the party's next brief. If the opposing party files a response in opposition within seven days as required by Rule 27, the time for filing the next brief is rescheduled and does not begin to run until the date the court enters an order on the motion for leave. The response in opposition is to address only whether leave should be granted under Rule 29(a). The party opposing the motion will respond to the merits of the amicus brief in that party's next brief only if the motion for leave is granted. The former practice of a separate brief in response to the amicus brief is abolished. If the court grants leave to file, however, it may condition leave by extending the number of pages permitted under Rule 28(h) for the opposing party's next brief.
Under Rule 27, a motion for leave to file an amicus brief is decided by a single justice.
[Amended effective August 2, 2012.]
.