reply brief


Also found in: Wikipedia.

reply brief

n. the written legal argument of the respondent (trial court winner) in answer to the "opening brief" of an appellant (a trial court loser who has appealed). (See: appeal, respondent, appellee)

References in periodicals archive ?
1 supplements Rule 56 by setting forth specific procedures for the parties to follow in moving for or opposing summary judgment"); supra notes 7-8 and accompanying text (noting inconsistencies in local reply brief filing rules).
Then, the petitioner gets a limited number of words for the Reply Brief.
Stonestreet Stables, in a reply brief reported by the Bloodhorse, claimed the Tandy motion was filed in "bad faith" by the minority ownership.
Points not argued are waived and shall not be raised in the reply brief, in oral argument, or on petition for rehearing.
LEGAL COMMENTARY: It is well settled as a principle of appellate law that an appellate court will not review an issue not raised in an appellant's brief, but which is raised for the first time in its reply brief.
The FCC's response brief is now due on September 17, and the local government organizations' reply brief will be due on October 4, 2007.
The respondent and the respondent-intervenor also filed two motions in opposition to the petitioner's response to their brief, one to strike portions of the reply brief and the other to disallow the entire reply brief The respondent-intervenor's motion to take judicial notice was allowed.
The deadline for a response from the government is February 27, with a reply brief required no later than March 13.
After Board Enforcement Counsel filed a motion with the ALJ to overrule these, and other, privilege objections, Bazy filed an opposition to Enforcement Counsel's motion and a sur-reply to its reply brief.
But you could see by the looks flitting over their eyes, that they fervently hoped I would keep my reply brief.
In its reply brief the IRS argued that the sale of RHI stock to HMI was a redemption taxable as a dividend because of the sections 304 and 302 overlap (sale of the stock to a sister corporation).
In her reply brief, Mary Beth Cyze, assistant corporation counsel for Wilmette, argued that constitutional privacy protection applies only to "fundamental" rights, and that the courts have never put owning a handgun in that category.