Jurisdictional Deadlines in the Wake of Kontrick and Eberhart: Harmonizing 160 Years of Precedent

Abstract

INTRODUCTION|Deadlines and time limits are woven into every stage of litigation. They begin a lawsuit, move it forward, and eventually, bring it to a close. Some deadlines are flexible and can be extended simply by an agreement of the parties or permission of the court. Yet other deadlines are different. They mark the beginning or ending of significant parts of litigation. Because of that, the law has long recognized that the goals of finality and evenhandedness do not allow these time limits to be extended by the parties or overlooked by the court. Judges and lawyers from the mid-nineteenth century to the early twenty-first century have called these deadlines "jurisdictional." A classic example is the time to appeal. In 1982, the United States Supreme Court capsulated what had been common knowledge for generations of judges and lawyers: "It is well settled that the requirement of a timely notice of appeal is 'mandatory and jurisdictional." And as recently as 2003, the Supreme Court stated unequivocally that it was "accepted fact that some time limits are jurisdictional...