Short answer. Extensions are not granted as a matter of course. Rule 44, Section 12 allows an extension only for good and sufficient cause, and only if the motion for extension is filed before the original period to file the brief has expired.

What the law says

Extension of time for the filing of briefs will not be allowed, except for good and sufficient cause, and only if the motion for extension is filed before the expiration of the time sought to be extended.

Rule 44, Section 12 — Extension of time for filing briefs. Read the full provision →

Extensions are the exception, not the rule

Section 12 sets a restrictive default: extension of time for the filing of briefs will not be allowed, except for good and sufficient cause, and only if the motion for extension is filed before the expiration of the time sought to be extended. The starting assumption is that the original deadline holds, and the burden falls on the party seeking more time to show why that assumption should not control in a particular case.

Two conditions must both be met

Getting an extension requires satisfying two separate requirements at once: there must be good and sufficient cause for needing more time, and the motion asking for the extension must be filed before the current deadline runs out. A motion filed after the period has already expired does not qualify, no matter how good the underlying reason, because the second condition is about timing and does not bend for a strong excuse.

The practical lesson for counsel

Because the timing condition is strict, counsel who anticipate needing more time to prepare a brief should file the extension motion well before the deadline, not on the last possible day. Waiting until the period has already lapsed forecloses the extension route entirely, regardless of how compelling the cause might otherwise have been, since a late motion fails on timing alone before the court ever reaches the merits of the excuse.

What counts as good and sufficient cause

The rule does not itemize what qualifies as good and sufficient cause, leaving that judgment to the Court of Appeals on the facts of each motion. What the text does make clear is that the bar is meant to be real: the phrase 'will not be allowed, except for' frames the extension as a departure from the norm, not a routine accommodation, so a bare request for more preparation time without an explanation carries little weight against the presumption that the original period should stand.

Who this covers and what missing the brief deadline costs

Section 12 applies to briefs generally, so it binds an appellant filing the main brief and an appellee filing a responsive brief alike — either side needing more time faces the same good-and-sufficient-cause standard and the same before-expiration filing requirement. Satisfying both conditions does not by itself guarantee the extension; the section leaves the grant to the Court of Appeals' discretion rather than making it automatic. The stakes differ by party: an appellant who lets the brief period lapse without a timely extension motion risks having the appeal dismissed outright for failure to file, while an appellee in the same position risks having the case submitted for decision without the benefit of an answering brief.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.