Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Designated Diffidence: District Court Judges On The Courts Of Appeals Papers Of General Interest, James J. Brudney, Corey Distlear
Designated Diffidence: District Court Judges On The Courts Of Appeals Papers Of General Interest, James J. Brudney, Corey Distlear
Faculty Scholarship
Since 1980, District CourtJudges, designated pursuant to federal statute, have helped decide over 75,000 court of appeals cases-nearly one of every five merits decisions. Although scholars and judges have warned that the presence of these visitors on appellate panels may undermine consistency, legitimacy, or collegiality, little empirical evidence exists related to such concerns. Working with an especially complete data set of labor law opinions, the authors found that district court visitors perform in a much more diffident fashion than their appellate colleagues. They contribute notably fewer majority opinions and dissents. In addition, their participations do not reflect their professional or …
Stalking Secret Law: What Predicts Publication In The United States Courts Of Appeals , Deborah J. Merritt, James J. Brudney
Stalking Secret Law: What Predicts Publication In The United States Courts Of Appeals , Deborah J. Merritt, James J. Brudney
Faculty Scholarship
Nearly four fifths of federal court of appeals opinions are unpublished. For more than 25 years, judges and scholars have debated the wisdom and fairness of this body of "secret" law. The debate over unpublished opinions recently intensified when the Eighth Circuit held that the Constitution requires courts to give these opinions precedential value. Despite continued controversy over unpublished opinions, limited empirical evidence exists on the nature of those opinions. Working with an especially complete dataset of labor law opinions and multivariate statistical methods, we were able to identify the factors that predict publication. Some of those factors, such as …