Law Commons^™

Appellate Capacity And Caseload Growth, Thomas B. Marvell

Akron Law Review

This article has two purposes. The first is to show that, indeed, the three categories of responses to caseload growth are the only feasible responses. This article argues that case-management techniques, another popular response, is of little or no use in reducing the substantial backlogs that result from the caseload growth. Instead of focusing on case management techniques one should focus on the judges - their number and their productivity - as sources of appellate court delay.

Response To Professor Parness And Mr. Reagle, Jack Grant Day

Akron Law Review

I subscribe to so much of the reform suggestions proposed by the authors that I believe my response can be most useful if confined to some emphasis or expansion of concurrent views, specific reference to disagreements and support for points of reform needed but not recommended.

Reforms In The Business And Operating Manner Of The Ohio Courts Of Appeals, Jeffrey A. Parness, Jack E. Reagle

Akron Law Review

This article will review, and comment upon, some of the techniques available to the Ohio appeals courts. The task of preparing this article was facilitated greatly by the many Ohio appeals court judges who responded to a survey letter, reproduced in the appendix, sent by the authors in the Summer of 1981. The results of this survey are incorporated in the following pages, though we are confident they do not represent the judges' last words. To promote further dialogue, we have deleted references to the names of the particular judges whose remarks are noted, and have instead assigned each judge …

Frenemies Of The Court: The Many Faces Of Amicus Curiae, Helen A. Anderson

Articles

Ask any lawyer what an "amicus curiae" is, and you will be told that the term means "friend of the court." The term has positive, even warm, connotations. Amicus briefs provide additional information or perspectives to assist courts in deciding issues of public importance. Interest groups, law professors, and politically engaged lawyers are happy to participate in important cases through such briefs. Amicus curiae participation is defended as democratic input into what is otherwise not a democratic branch of government.

Yet, amici curiae—nonparties who are nevertheless advocates, who are not bound by rules of standing and justiciability, or even rules …

Anti-Plaintiff Bias In The Federal Appellate Courts, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Kevin M. Clermont

A recent study of appellate outcomes reveals that defendants succeed significantly more often than plaintiffs on appeal from civil trials-especially from jury trials.

Plaintiphobia In The Appellate Courts: Civil Rights Really Do Differ From Negotiable Instruments, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Kevin M. Clermont

Professors Clermont and Eisenberg conducted a systematic analysis of appellate court behavior and report that defendants have a substantial advantage over plaintiffs on appeal. Their analysis attempted to control for different variables that may affect the decision to appeal or the appellate outcome, including case complexity, case type, amount in controversy, and whether there had been a judge or a jury trial. Once they accounted for these variables and explored and discarded various alternate explanations, they came to the conclusion that a defendants' advantage exists probably because of appellate judges' misperceptions that trial level adjudicators are pro-plaintiff.

Appeal From Jury Or Judge Trial: Defendants' Advantage, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Kevin M. Clermont

The prevailing "expert" opinion is that jury verdicts are largely immune to appellate revision. Using a database that combines all federal civil trials and appeals decided since 1988, we find that jury trials, as a group, are in fact not so special on appeal. But the data do show that defendants succeed more than plaintiffs on appeal from civil trials, and especially from jury trials. Defendants appealing their losses after trial by jury obtain reversals at a 31% rate, while losing plaintiffs succeed in only 13% of their appeals from jury trials. Both descriptive analyses of the results and more …

Judge Harry Edwards: A Case In Point!, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Kevin M. Clermont

Judge Harry Edwards dislikes empirical work that is not flattering to federal appellate judges. A few years ago Dean Richard Revesz published an empirical study of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit providing further support for the rather tame proposition that judges’ political orientation has some effect on outcome in some politically charged cases. A year later Judge Edwards published a criticism phrased in extreme terms. Dean Revesz then wrote a devastating reply by which he demonstrated that Judge Edwards “is simply wrong with respect to each of the numerous criticisms that he levels.” We believe …

How Should We Study District Judge Decision-Making?, Pauline T. Kim, Margo Schlanger, Christina L. Boyd, Andrew D. Martin

Articles

Understanding judicial decision-making requires attention to the specific institutional settings in which judges operate. The choices available to judges are determined not only by the law and facts of the case but also by procedural context. The incentives and constraints shaping judges’ decision-making will vary depending on, for example, whether they have a life-appointment or are elected; whether they hear cases alone or with colleagues; and whether and under what circumstances their decisions might be altered, overturned, or undone by the actions of others. The basic insight that the institutional context matters has led to increasingly sophisticated studies of how …

Where Equity Meets Expertise: Re-Thinking Appellate Review In Complex Litigation, Michael J. Hays

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The field of complex litigation continues to grow as both an academic study and a popular phenomenon. One cannot escape news accounts of major class action litigation, and lawyers continue to find new ways to push the outer bounds of civil litigation practices to accommodate large-scale disputes involving multiple claims or parties. Many question whether traditional procedures can or should apply to these cases. Drawing on this well-recognized procedural tension, this Article explores the relationship between trial and appellate courts in complex litigation and argues for a revised standard of appellate review for trial court decisions affecting the party structure …

Slides: Tribal Perspectives On Natural Resource Policy, Donald Wharton

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

Presenter: Donald Wharton, Native American Rights Fund

16 slides

Preventing The Subversion Of Devlin V. Scardelletti, Brian Wolfman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Devlin v. Scardelletti that objecting class members could appeal a federal district court’s approval of a class settlement without first intervening in the litigation. Public interest lawyer Brian Wolfman says the ruling was a victory for both objectors and the integrity of class action procedure: Objectors, he argues, help keep fairness hearings fair.

But a number of courts are now ruling that Devlin only applies to non-opt-out class actions, rather than the much more numerous ones that give class members opt-out rights. In this article, Wolfman details the exact wording of the …

Plaintiphobia In The Appellate Courts: Civil Rights Really Do Differ From Negotiable Instruments, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Professors Clermont and Eisenberg conducted a systematic analysis of appellate court behavior and report that defendants have a substantial advantage over plaintiffs on appeal. Their analysis attempted to control for different variables that may affect the decision to appeal or the appellate outcome, including case complexity, case type, amount in controversy, and whether there had been a judge or a jury trial. Once they accounted for these variables and explored and discarded various alternate explanations, they came to the conclusion that a defendants' advantage exists probably because of appellate judges' misperceptions that trial level adjudicators are pro-plaintiff.

Judge Harry Edwards: A Case In Point!, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Judge Harry Edwards dislikes empirical work that is not flattering to federal appellate judges. A few years ago Dean Richard Revesz published an empirical study of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit providing further support for the rather tame proposition that judges’ political orientation has some effect on outcome in some politically charged cases. A year later Judge Edwards published a criticism phrased in extreme terms. Dean Revesz then wrote a devastating reply by which he demonstrated that Judge Edwards “is simply wrong with respect to each of the numerous criticisms that he levels.” We believe …

Appeal From Jury Or Judge Trial: Defendants' Advantage, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The prevailing "expert" opinion is that jury verdicts are largely immune to appellate revision. Using a database that combines all federal civil trials and appeals decided since 1988, we find that jury trials, as a group, are in fact not so special on appeal. But the data do show that defendants succeed more than plaintiffs on appeal from civil trials, and especially from jury trials. Defendants appealing their losses after trial by jury obtain reversals at a 31% rate, while losing plaintiffs succeed in only 13% of their appeals from jury trials. Both descriptive analyses of the results and more …

Anti-Plaintiff Bias In The Federal Appellate Courts, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

A recent study of appellate outcomes reveals that defendants succeed significantly more often than plaintiffs on appeal from civil trials-especially from jury trials.

The Nation's Teacher: The Role Of The United States Supreme Court During Times Of Crisis, Robert Jerome Glennon

Seattle University Law Review

This Article will suggest that TJ has occasionally been part of the United States Supreme Court's jurisprudence. The Court sometimes finds itself at the center of deeply-divisive national controversies. On those occasions, the opinion of the Court can, and ought to, play a role in healing the nation's controversy-inflicted wounds. The Court should consciously craft an opinion that speaks to the American people as a whole and that calls on every citizen, regardless of the fervency of his or her beliefs, to accept the resolution of the controversy offered by the Court. During such crises, citizens are unlikely to accept …

The Myth Of The Disposable Opinion: Unpublished Opinions And Government Litigants In The United States Courts Of Appeals, Lauren K. Robel

Michigan Law Review

This article discusses the courts' adoption of the limited publication plans and analyzes the methods used by the courts to discourage the use of unpublished opinions. It also discusses the results of a survey conducted to determine if, and how, government litigants - some of the chief unanticipated beneficiaries of the publication plans make use of unpublished opinions. Finally, it challenges the assumption that limited publication is essential in an age of caseload crisis.

Tort Litigation And Social Change: Accidents And Trial Court Litigation In West Virginia, 1870-1940, Frank W. Munger

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Prosecutorial Misconduct: Quelling The Tide Of Improper Comment To The Jury, Frank D. Celebrezze

Cleveland State Law Review

The United States Supreme Court, in Darden v. Wainwright, stated that where the error is forensic in nature, appellate courts should reverse a conviction when the prosecutor's misconduct "so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process." Therefore, except in the most egregious cases, appellate courts are placed in the uncomfortable position of condemning the prosecutor's behavior while affirming the conviction, thus fostering what an appellate judge once called "a deplorably cynical attitude towards the judiciary. This article will focus on one aspect of prosecutorial misconduct which has been chronicled with alarming …

An Appellate Court Dilemma And A Solution Through Subject Matter Organization, Daniel J. Meador

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The recent litigation explosion presents a two-pronged dilemma for American appellate courts. If, on the one hand, the number of appellate judges is not expanded to keep abreast of growing case loads, there is a risk that courts will rely too heavily on professional staff, thereby watering down the decision-making process. If, on the other hand, the number of judges is proportionately increased with the growth in appellate litigation, the number of three-judge decisional units will also increase, thereby threatening predictability and uniformity in the law of the jurisdiction. This Article undertakes to explain that dilemma and to offer a …

Oral Argument And Expediting Appeals: A Compatible Combination, Joy A. Chapper

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The purpose of this Article is to explore these issues in light of Sacramento's experience with the expedited appeal procedure. The data presented here are drawn from an evaluation of the first twelve months of the procedure's operation. This evaluation was based on court records of the more than one hundred cases that followed the expedited procedure to completion, in-person interviews with members of the court and court staff, and telephone interviews with participating attorneys. Part I briefly sets out the new procedure and the context in which this procedure was introduced and integrated. Part II discusses the conclusions that …

Civil Litigation And Jura Novit Curia, Lawrence G. Baxter

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.