Erin B. Kaheny

TL;DR: This paper examined the relationship between the status of litigants, especially the comparison of repeat player "haves" to oneshotters who are ususally "have nots" appearing as litigant in state supreme courts, and their rates of success in that forum.

TL;DR: This article developed a theoretical framework which conceptualized career stage to account for variability in voting by circuit judges and tested hypotheses by modeling the error variance in a vote choice model. But their findings indicate that judges are more predictable in their voting during their early and late career stages.

TL;DR: This article found that women attorneys are less likely to receive a favorable vote by a justice than are the male counsel they oppose and that conservative justices are more likely than their liberal counterparts to vote against litigants represented by female counsel at oral argument.

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined the relationship between lawyer gender and decision making on the United States Courts of Appeals and found that both male and female judges are equally supportive of female lawyers even when the circuit is not particularly gender diverse.

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigate whether women lawyers face a more difficult time winning cases before the US Supreme Court than men, and they find that men are more likely to side with litigation teams with larger proportions of women lawyers.