Journal ArticleDOI
Opinion Writing in the Federal District Courts
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
This paper examined what factors determine opinion writing behavior among district court judges and found that legal, hierarchical, and institutional features are critical in motivating opinion writing and opinion length and that personal factors have very limited effects.Abstract:
American trial court judges’ roles and behavior vary greatly from their appellate court brethren. One such area of difference has to do with opinion writing behavior, an area where trial judges hold a great deal of discretion in determining whether to write an opinion and, if they do, how long the opinion should be. To examine what factors determine opinion writing behavior among district court judges, this study relies on analyses of an original dataset of civil cases that terminated in eighteen federal district courts from 2000 to 2006. The results indicate that legal, hierarchical, and institutional features are critical in motivating opinion writing and opinion length and that personal factors have very limited effects. The fruits of this exercise have important implications for how we view and model the behavior of trial court judges in the future.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Adjudicating Executive Privilege: Federal Administrative Agencies and Deliberative Process Privilege Claims in U.S. District Courts
Journal ArticleDOI
Mapping the Iceberg: The Impact of Data Sources on the Study of District Courts
TL;DR: Kim et al. as mentioned in this paper examined the varying extent to which cases and judicial activity are visible in the several data sources commonly used by district court researchers and found that these differences in case and motion visibility can affect the results of empirical analyses relating to, for example, the success rates of litigants and whether the party of the appointing president affects judicial behavior.
Journal ArticleDOI
Gender, expert advice, and judicial gatekeeping in the United States
TL;DR: Results indicate that the organizational role of trial judge may not be enough to offset the wider effects of the gender system on perceptions of experts, and that women are more likely than men to consider expert advice.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Gender and Leadership Style: A Meta-Analysis
Alice H. Eagly,Blair T. Johnson +1 more
TL;DR: In contrast to the gender-stereotypic expectation that women lead in an interpersonaily oriented style and men in a task-oriented style, female and male leaders did not differ in these two styles in organizational studies as mentioned in this paper.
Journal ArticleDOI
Measuring Issue Salience
Lee Epstein,Jeffrey A. Segal +1 more
TL;DR: The authors proposed an alternative approach to measure issue saliency for elite actors: the coverage the media affords to a given issue, which is a reproducible, valid, and transportable method of assessing whether the particular actors under investigation view an issue as salient or not.
Journal ArticleDOI
The Judicial Common Space
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a measurement strategy for placing judges of lower courts and justices of higher courts in the same policy space, and provide a descriptive look at the results of their approach.
Journal ArticleDOI
Untangling the Causal Effects of Sex on Judging
TL;DR: This paper found that women are significantly more likely to rule in favor of the rights litigant when a woman serves on the panel and that men are significantly less likely to vote for a woman on a panel when the judge is a man.
Journal ArticleDOI
Picking Federal Judges: A Note on Policy and Partisan Selection Agendas:
TL;DR: In this article, the authors employ judicial decisionmaking in the U.S. Courts of Appeals as a window through which to reexamine the politics of selection to the lower courts.