The Business of the U.S. District Courts

Hornby, D. Brock

doi:10.4135/9781071800942.n6

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The cases heard most by district courts are ones in which precedent is more clearly established, while those heard higher up the hierarchy contain more uncertainty. In their role as trial courts, district courts are meant to primarily engage in fact finding (Hornby 2007). After gathering information, the district court judge issues a ruling based on how they believe the law applies.…”

Section: Federal Courts and Citationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ideological Determinants of Citations to Supreme Court Precedent Across the Federal Judiciary

Salam

2022

J. law courts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do ideological factors explain the citation patterns of federal courts? Current literature uses citation data in myriad ways but leaves open the question of how ideological factors may influence citation from each level of the judicial hierarchy differently. Combining original data on citations to Supreme Court opinions by district courts from 1969 to 2005 with existing data on citations by the courts of appeals and Supreme Court, I present a more complete portrait of the scope of a precedent across the federal judiciary. I find that ideological factors are associated with differences in citing behavior on the federal courts. Both the appellate and district courts are responsive to Supreme Court precedent, but district courts are not equally responsive to liberal and conservative updates to doctrine. Further, as the Supreme Court ideology changes from the time of setting precedent, appellate courts are less likely to cite the precedent, but district courts cite it more. These results suggest that the relationship between ideology and precedent adherence is complicated by the distinct institutional features of the Supreme Court, courts of appeals, and district courts.

show abstract

Section: Federal Courts and Citationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ideological Determinants of Citations to Supreme Court Precedent Across the Federal Judiciary

Salam

2022

J. law courts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…20 The rarity of civil trials and the prevalence of settlements have also been linked to a shift in the focus of judicial functions: from trial and adjudication to pre-trial case management 21 and settlement promotion. 22 Some have suggested that the trial judge as a 'black-robed figure up on the bench, presiding publicly over trials … has become an endangered species' 23 that is vanishing along with trials, or at least becoming significantly transformed in nature. The meaning of this transition for judges, litigants, and the legal system is the subject of an ongoing debate.…”

Section: Low Trial Rates Prevalent Settlements and The Role Of Judgesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judicial Procedural Involvement (JPI): A Metric for Judges’ Role in Civil Litigation, Settlement, and Access to Justice

Sela

Gabay-Egozi

2020

Journal of Law and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine judges' role in civil litigation by studying empirically the relationship between judicial procedural involvement (JPI) and lawsuits' mode of disposition (MoD). Furthermore, we propose JPI as a metric for the allocation of judicial attention to litigants. Applying the framework to Israeli trial court data, we find that 60 per cent of cases included JPI (through hearings and rulings on motions) whereas 40 per cent involved only the court's institutional function. By juxtaposing JPI and MoD data, we shed light on the scope of judicial involvement in settlements, the ratio between judges' normative public-life function and their problem-solving function, and other pertinent questions. Since nowadays lawsuits are rarely adjudicated, trial rates are low, and litigants in person (pro se litigants) are common, we argue that access to justice should also be construed in terms of access to judicial attention throughout the proceeding, which is readily measurable through JPI.

show abstract

The Business of the U.S. District Courts

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Ideological Determinants of Citations to Supreme Court Precedent Across the Federal Judiciary

Ideological Determinants of Citations to Supreme Court Precedent Across the Federal Judiciary

Judicial Procedural Involvement (JPI): A Metric for Judges’ Role in Civil Litigation, Settlement, and Access to Justice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About