What is a Motion for Leave?

Mary McMahon
Mary McMahon

A motion for leave is a motion filed in court which asks the court to consider allowing the filer of the motion to depart from the established procedures of the court, most classically procedures setting out specific timeframes which must be followed when filing documents and making motions. For example, a motion for leave might ask the court to accept a document after the filing deadline.

The decision to grant a motion for leave is at the discretion of the court.
The decision to grant a motion for leave is at the discretion of the court.

The decision to grant a motion for leave is at the discretion of the court. The subject of the request is not a right under the law and the court can determine that it should not be granted, given the available information. The motion usually presents information which is designed to be compelling for the court. The judge weighs the information and makes a determination, which may be offered with an opinion explaining why the motion was denied or approved.

Judges are allowed considerable discretion on the bench. While they cannot make rulings which violate the law and they must follow the rules of the court, the rules do provide room for judges to make decisions about how matters should proceed. This is done with the understanding that every trial is different and it is impossible to come up with rules for every occasion. If judges were bound by utterly inflexible rules, miscarriages of justice might result.

Essentially, this type of motion asks permission to do something. The court considers what is being asked, why the request is being made, and what the outcome of denial or approval will be. For instance, someone may file a motion for leave asking for permission to file an amicus brief after the deadline has expired. The judge may determine that the brief includes important information which is highly relevant to the trial, and thus that the motion should be granted. On the other hand, the judge might argue that the brief contains no substantially new material and thus there is no benefit to granting the motion.

Like other legal motions, a motion for leave is sometimes used as a stalling tactic. While the motion is being considered, court cannot proceed, and this may buy time to work on an aspect of a case. Judges are well aware of this and may frown upon lawyers who try to use too many stalling tactics in the course of a trial. In the United States, this can interfere with the Constitutionally guaranteed right to a speedy trial.

Mary McMahon
Mary McMahon

Ever since she began contributing to the site several years ago, Mary has embraced the exciting challenge of being a wiseGEEK researcher and writer. Mary has a liberal arts degree from Goddard College and spends her free time reading, cooking, and exploring the great outdoors.

You might also Like

Readers Also Love

Discussion Comments


Lawyers or Bar members are foreign agents under federal statutes. Look it up. They lost US citizenship as soon as they took their traitorous oath to the British. Yes, the American Bar is a subsidiary of the British Accredited Registry. About 99 percent of the public has no clue when they are represented by a Bar member, they become wards of the court (imbecile/incompetent/child) and they are now the last ones to get any justice because statutes and codes only have lawful effect when they, in fact, only coincide with real law -- that's the law of the land, something an ignorant Bar member usually doesn't know.

Most of the brainwashed, programmed traitors don't even know what Corpus Delicti is or how it must be established for a crime to be committed and give cause or jurisdiction. Go ask your lawyer, and put him or her on the spot, face to face, and see his or her ignorant reaction and denial such things exist. He or she will run to Google it later, I'm sure.


I realize that the law dictates that a defendant is allowed a speedy trial. That is the reason why there are deadlines to file this and that so that the trial moves along at a good clip. That's all fair and good.

On the other hand, trial lawyers are under great pressure to collect, study and file all the information and evidence that they need to represent their client. Even with motion for leave being available, they are still rushed. If they had more time in the beginning, I think trials might be more just.


From reading the article, I think that it must be difficult to provide a fair yet speedy trial for the defendant. The judge has to figure out if lawyers are asking for a motion for leave because they are trying to slow down the trial so they can work on their side of the trial. Or if they truly want to file new information that is relevant.

If a judge grants a motion for leave, he needs to carefully determine if the new information will make a difference in providing a fair trial.

Post your comments
Forgot password?