The case arose after pro bono lawyers for an Alabama death-row inmate left their firm and missed a deadline for filing his post-conviction appeal. DeMott’s brief argued that at the time the deadline passed, none of the inmate’s lawyers could have been regarded as his agents to the extent that he could be bound by their mistakes; they had abandoned him, according to the rules of agency. Because the attorneys did not inform the court of their departure from the firm or appointment of new counsel, their actions “do not meet any plausible standard for attributing responsibility to [Cory] Maples,” the brief states.
The brief was written and filed by Walter Dellinger, Duke’s Douglas B. Maggs Professor Emeritus of Law, a leading appellate advocate and partner at O’Melveny & Myers.
» Watch the video
On Jan. 18, the Supreme Court ruled 7–2 in favor of Maples.