Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
State Courts (state + court)
Selected AbstractsWILLIAM H. REHNQUIST AWARD FOR JUDICIAL EXCELLENCE ADDRESSFAMILY COURT REVIEW, Issue 2 2009Hon. Jonathan Lippman The William H. Rehnquist Award is one of the most celebrated judicial honors in the country. It is given each year to a state court judge who demonstrates the "highest level of judicial excellence, integrity, fairness, and professional ethics." The 2008 recipient, Jonathan Lippman, was recently appointed and confirmed as Chief Judge of the State of New York. Chief Judge Lippman was previously the Presiding Justice of the Appellate Division of the First Judicial Department of the New York State Supreme Court. He was appointed New York's Chief Administrative Judge by Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye and served from January 1996 to May 2007 and was responsible for the operation of a court system with a $2.4 billion budget, 1300 state-paid judges, 2300 town and village judges, and 16,000 nonjudicial personnel. Among his numerous professional activities, Chief Judge Lippman served as president of the Conference of State Court Administrators from 2005 to 2006 and was the vice-chair of the National Center for State Courts from 2005 to 2006, where he was a member of the Board of Directors from 2003 to 2007. During his tenure, Chief Judge Lippman has been the recipient of numerous awards and recognitions, including the 2006 Fund For Modern Courts Cyrus R. Vance Tribute for Vision, Integrity and Dedication to the Fair Administration of Justice Personified by Cyrus R. Vance (November 27, 2006); the New York County Lawyers' Association Conspicuous Service Award in Recognition of Many Years of Outstanding Public Service (September 28, 2006); and the Award for Excellence in Public Service of the New York State Bar Association's Committee on Attorneys in Public Service (January 24, 2006). Chief Judge Lippman received a Bachelor of Arts in Government and International Relations from New York University, Washington Square College, where he graduated cum laude in 1965. He also received his J.D. from New York University in 1968. Below is the speech he delivered after accepting the William H. Rehnquist Award from U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts. [source] Estimating the Accuracy of Jury VerdictsJOURNAL OF EMPIRICAL LEGAL STUDIES, Issue 2 2007Bruce D. Spencer Average accuracy of jury verdicts for a set of cases can be studied empirically and systematically even when the correct verdict cannot be known. The key is to obtain a second rating of the verdict, for example, the judge's, as in the recent study of criminal cases in the United States by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC). That study, like the famous Kalven-Zeisel study, showed only modest judge-jury agreement. Simple estimates of jury accuracy can be developed from the judge-jury agreement rate; the judge's verdict is not taken as the gold standard. Although the estimates of accuracy are subject to error, under plausible conditions they tend to overestimate the average accuracy of jury verdicts. The jury verdict was estimated to be accurate in no more than 87 percent of the NCSC cases (which, however, should not be regarded as a representative sample with respect to jury accuracy). More refined estimates, including false conviction and false acquittal rates, are developed with models using stronger assumptions. For example, the conditional probability that the jury incorrectly convicts given that the defendant truly was not guilty (a "Type I error") was estimated at 0.25, with an estimated standard error (s.e.) of 0.07, the conditional probability that a jury incorrectly acquits given that the defendant truly was guilty ("Type II error") was estimated at 0.14 (s.e. 0.03), and the difference was estimated at 0.12 (s.e. 0.08). The estimated number of defendants in the NCSC cases who truly are not guilty but are convicted does seem to be smaller than the number who truly are guilty but are acquitted. The conditional probability of a wrongful conviction, given that the defendant was convicted, is estimated at 0.10 (s.e. 0.03). [source] The Vanishing Trial: An Examination of Trials and Related Matters in Federal and State CourtsJOURNAL OF EMPIRICAL LEGAL STUDIES, Issue 3 2004Marc Galanter This article traces the decline in the portion of cases that are terminated by trial and the decline in the absolute number of trials in various American judicial fora. The portion of federal civil cases resolved by trial fell from 11.5 percent in 1962 to 1.8 percent in 2002, continuing a long historic decline. More startling was the 60 percent decline in the absolute number of trials since the mid 1980s. The makeup of trials shifted from a predominance of torts to a predominance of civil rights, but trials are declining in every case category. A similar decline in both the percentage and the absolute number of trials is found in federal criminal cases and in bankruptcy cases. The phenomenon is not confined to the federal courts; there are comparable declines of trials, both civil and criminal, in the state courts, where the great majority of trials occur. Plausible causes for this decline include a shift in ideology and practice among litigants, lawyers, and judges. Another manifestation of this shift is the diversion of cases to alternative dispute resolution forums. Within the courts, judges conduct trials at only a fraction of the rate that their predecessors did, but they are more heavily involved in the early stages of cases. Although virtually every other indicator of legal activity is rising, trials are declining not only in relation to cases in the courts but to the size of the population and the size of the economy. The consequences of this decline for the functioning of the legal system and for the larger society remain to be explored. [source] Participants' Attitudes in the Utah Juvenile Victim-Offender Mediation ProgramJUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JOURNAL, Issue 1 2002BARTON POULSON PH.D. ABSTRACT This paper describes an archival evaluation of the Juvenile Court Victim-Offender Mediation Program (VOMP) of the Utah State Courts in Salt Lake City. From 1997 to 2000, 147 victims and 330 offenders reported their attitudes towards their experiences in VOMP. Although victims were more satisfied than offenders for some outcomes, all participants reported exceptionally high satisfaction. These promising results are consistent with other published studies on the effectiveness of VOMP and other forms of restorative justice in demonstrating the promise of mediation in criminal justice. [source] A satisfied clientele seeking more diverse services: Latinos and the courts,BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES & THE LAW, Issue 2 2001Rodolfo O. de la Garza Ph.D. This article assesses Latino views of the court system, both of their beliefs about the courts and their experiences with the courts. Relying primarily on the Latino over-sample of the National Center for State Courts (2000) survey of public attitudes toward the courts, we evaluate three aspects of the Latino,judicial relationship. First, we measure whether there are differences between Latino and non-Latino views of the courts. Second, we assess whether there are differences within the Latino community, particularly differences based on nativity, in Latino attitudes toward the courts. Finally, we assess the implications of Latino views of the courts for US society in general. We are particularly concerned about whether having a greater share of Latinos in the population will create new pressures to reform the judiciary. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Attorney Fees in Class Action Settlements: An Empirical StudyJOURNAL OF EMPIRICAL LEGAL STUDIES, Issue 1 2004Theodore Eisenberg Study of two comprehensive class action case data sets covering 1993,2002 shows that the amount of client recovery is overwhelmingly the most important determinant of the attorney fee award. Even in cases in which the courts engage in the lodestar calculation (the product of reasonable hours and a reasonable hourly rate), the client's recovery generally explains the pattern of awards better than the lodestar. Thus, the time and expense of a lodestar calculation may be wasteful. We also find no robust evidence that either recoveries for plaintiffs or fees of their attorneys increased over time. The mean fee award in common fund cases is well below the widely quoted one-third figure, constituting 21.9 percent of the recovery across all cases for a comprehensive data set of published cases. A scaling effect exists: fees constitute a lower percent of the client's recovery as the client's recovery increases. Fees are also correlated with risk: the presence of high risk is associated with a higher fee, while low-risk cases generate lower fees. Fees as a percent of class recovery were found to be higher in federal than state court. The presence of "soft" relief (such as injunctive relief or coupons) has no material effect on the fee, regardless of whether the soft relief was included in the quantified benefit for the class used as the basis for computing the attorney fee. The study also addresses costs and expenses. Like fees, these display significant scale effects. The article proposes a simple methodology by which courts can evaluate the reasonableness of fee requests. [source] Legal and technical defensibility of data and the Triad approachREMEDIATION, Issue 2 2005Robert Howe The Triad approach was developed primarily to limit decision uncertainty during cleanups at hazardous waste sites. The fundamental principles of the Triad approach include development of a site characterization model and use of emerging technologies, which can provide data at a higher density than could be affordably collected using traditional data collection methodologies, to refine the model in essentially real time. New data formats are used collaboratively with data in traditional formats to iteratively pin down the relative concentration, nature, and extent of contaminants, thus minimizing decision uncertainties. This article examines the potential admissibility as evidence in legal proceedings of data collected by technologies designed to improve the density of information that are commonly used during the course of Triad-type projects. The article explains that such criteria may vary depending on the purpose for which the evidence is to be used (e.g., as direct evidence to prove site conditions or as support for the testimony of an expert witness) and the court in which the legal proceeding would take place (e.g., federal court or state court). Admissibility in federal courts of data both as direct evidence and as support for expert witness testimony is covered. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [source] Placing "Standard of Care" in Context: The Impact of Witness Potential and Attorney Reputation in Medical Malpractice LitigationJOURNAL OF EMPIRICAL LEGAL STUDIES, Issue 3 2006Catherine T. Harris Previous empirical studies have speculated about the role that factors other than negligence play in the resolution of medical malpractice claims. The present study identifies and evaluates the impact of three "strategic variables" in the medical malpractice litigation process: the witness potential of the defendant physician, the witness potential of the plaintiff, and the reputation of the plaintiff's attorney. These factors, unrelated to standard of care, make a difference in the outcome of medical malpractice cases. Data were collected from insurance company files on cases filed in the North Carolina state courts between 1991 and 1995. Analyses revealed that when the insurers' outside (physician) reviewers rated liability as probable, based on standard of care, settlement occurred in most of the cases. However, when liability was rated as uncertain or unlikely, strategic variables such as perceived witness potential and the reputation of the plaintiff's counsel were significant predictors of case outcome. Cases in which the defendant physician had a strategic advantage were much less likely to settle, while cases in which the plaintiff had a strategic advantage were much more likely to settle. [source] The Vanishing Trial: An Examination of Trials and Related Matters in Federal and State CourtsJOURNAL OF EMPIRICAL LEGAL STUDIES, Issue 3 2004Marc Galanter This article traces the decline in the portion of cases that are terminated by trial and the decline in the absolute number of trials in various American judicial fora. The portion of federal civil cases resolved by trial fell from 11.5 percent in 1962 to 1.8 percent in 2002, continuing a long historic decline. More startling was the 60 percent decline in the absolute number of trials since the mid 1980s. The makeup of trials shifted from a predominance of torts to a predominance of civil rights, but trials are declining in every case category. A similar decline in both the percentage and the absolute number of trials is found in federal criminal cases and in bankruptcy cases. The phenomenon is not confined to the federal courts; there are comparable declines of trials, both civil and criminal, in the state courts, where the great majority of trials occur. Plausible causes for this decline include a shift in ideology and practice among litigants, lawyers, and judges. Another manifestation of this shift is the diversion of cases to alternative dispute resolution forums. Within the courts, judges conduct trials at only a fraction of the rate that their predecessors did, but they are more heavily involved in the early stages of cases. Although virtually every other indicator of legal activity is rising, trials are declining not only in relation to cases in the courts but to the size of the population and the size of the economy. The consequences of this decline for the functioning of the legal system and for the larger society remain to be explored. [source] Does Employment Protection Reduce Productivity?THE ECONOMIC JOURNAL, Issue 521 2007Evidence From US States Theory predicts that mandated employment protection may reduce productivity by distorting production choices. We use the adoption of wrongful-discharge protection by state courts in the US from 1970 to 1999 to evaluate the empirical link between dismissal costs and productivity. Drawing on establishment-level data from the Census Bureau, our estimates suggest that wrongful-discharge protection reduces employment flows and firm entry rates. Moreover, plants engage in capital deepening and experience a decline in total factor productivity, indicative of altered production techniques. Evidence of strong contemporaneous growth in employment, however, leads us to view our findings as suggestive but tentative. [source] | ||||||||||