Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Courts

Faculty Scholarship

Series

Appellate procedure

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

Reign Of Error: District Courts Misreading The Supreme Court Over Rooker–Feldman Analysis, Thomas D. Rowe Jr., Edward L. Baskauskas Jan 2020

Reign Of Error: District Courts Misreading The Supreme Court Over Rooker–Feldman Analysis, Thomas D. Rowe Jr., Edward L. Baskauskas

Faculty Scholarship

Seventeen decisions in nine U.S. district courts from 2006 through 2019 have taken a demonstrably misgrounded starting point for Rooker–Feldman analysis. The cases have read language from a 2006 Supreme Court opinion, in which the Court quoted criteria stated by the lower court, as their guideline. But the Court summarily vacated the lower court’s judgment, and it had previously articulated, and has repeated, different criteria for federal courts to follow. The district-court decisions all appear to have reached correct results, but the mistake about criteria should be recognized and avoided as soon as possible before it creates potential mischief. And …


Panel Assignment In The Federal Courts Of Appeals, Marin K. Levy Jan 2017

Panel Assignment In The Federal Courts Of Appeals, Marin K. Levy

Faculty Scholarship

It is common knowledge that the federal courts of appeals typically hear cases in panels of three judges and that the composition of the panel can have significant consequences for case outcomes and for legal doctrine more generally. Yet neither legal scholars nor social scientists have focused on the question of how judges are selected for their panels. Instead, a substantial body of scholarship simply assumes that panel assignment is random. This Article provides what, up until this point, has been a missing account of panel assignment. Drawing on a multiyear qualitative study of five circuit courts, including in-depth interviews …


Challenging The Randomness Of Panel Assignment In The Federal Courts Of Appeals, Adam S. Chilton, Marin K. Levy Jan 2015

Challenging The Randomness Of Panel Assignment In The Federal Courts Of Appeals, Adam S. Chilton, Marin K. Levy

Faculty Scholarship

A fundamental academic assumption about the federal courts of appeals is that the three-judge panels that hear cases have been randomly configured. Scores of scholarly articles have noted this “fact,” and it has been relied on heavily by empirical researchers. Even though there are practical reasons to doubt that judges would always be randomly assigned to panels, this assumption has never been tested. This Article fill this void by doing so.

To determine whether the circuit courts utilize random assignment, we have created what we believe to be the largest dataset of panel assignments of those courts constructed to date. …


Appellate Courts, Michael E. Tigar Jan 2007

Appellate Courts, Michael E. Tigar

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.


A Critical Assessment Of The Cultural And Institutional Roles Of Appellate Courts (Review Essay), Paul D. Carrington Jan 2007

A Critical Assessment Of The Cultural And Institutional Roles Of Appellate Courts (Review Essay), Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

Reviewing, Daniel Meador et al., Appellate Courts: Structures, Functions, Processes, and Personnel (2d ed. 2006)


Ceremony And Realism: Demise Of Appellate Procedure, Paul D. Carrington Jan 1980

Ceremony And Realism: Demise Of Appellate Procedure, Paul D. Carrington

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.