Building an Integrated Model of Trial Court Decision Making: Predicting Plaintiff Success and Awards across Circuits

Abstract

This study creates and empirically tests an integrated model of trial court decision making to explore the hypothesis that jury verdicts reflect the social, political, and economic attributes of the community in which the court resides. In addition, the analyses examine the influence of attorneys, litigants, case facts, and judges on trial outcomes. Using an original data set comprising all reported civil trial verdicts decided in the state of Alabama from 2002 to 2008, we uncover strong evidence that community composition influences both the dispute resolution and resource allocation functions of trial courts. This research improves our knowledge of trial court decision making and contributes to our theoretical understanding of the effect of extralegal factors on the performance of political institutions.

Representation on the Courts? The Effects of Trial Judges’ Sex and Race

“…Many trial court scholars hold firmly to the belief that trial judges are primarily administrators, appliers of law, and organizational bureaucrats, spending their time in rote activities like holding hearings and supervising jury trials. Scholars often fail to find evidence that trial judges’ identities—including things like their ideological preferences—affect outcomes (e.g., Dumas and Haynie 2012; Keele et al 2009). If this view of trial judging is correct and generalizable, when applied to diversity judging, it could very well mean that even if diverse trial judges wish to favor diverse plaintiffs, their hands are often tied.…”

Race, gender, and place: How judicial identity and local context shape anti-discrimination decisions

“…Prior research in criminal sentencing and employment discrimination research has identified three factors of social context that may be particularly likely to shape decisions in employment discrimination cases: local political orientation (Garnett, 2012; McVeigh & Sobolewski, 2007; Skaggs, 2008, 2009; Songer & Unah, 2006), rurality (Dumas & Haynie, 2012; Eason et al, 2017; Oliver & Mendelberg, 2000; Songer & Unah, 2006), and presence in the south (Glaser, 1994; Oliver & Mendelberg, 2000; Songer & Davis, 1990). All three are relevant to shaping local norms related to discrimination, race, and gender.…”

“…A 2013 Pew study shows that rural, suburban, and urban residents have vastly different opinions on whether Black Americans are treated fairly at work, by the police, by the courts, in elections, at schools, in businesses, and by the healthcare industry (Pew Research Center, 2013). Previous research looking at all cases in Alabama found variations in civil cases proceeded, based on whether they occurred in a rural or urban county (Dumas & Haynie, 2012). Despite evidence that rural residents tend to have different racial opinions than White Americans, no research has examined if this influences decisions in employment discrimination cases.…”

Inmate Litigation, Legal Access, and Prison Privatization

“…Within those broad categories, variation remains in success before the courts. Largely, poor individuals or minorities are ranked as the least advantaged, and the federal government is ranked as the most advantaged, with other actors like individuals, corporations, and state governments ranking somewhere in between (Sheehan, Mishler and Songer 1992;Songer and Haire 1992;Dunworth and Rogers 1996;Songer, Sheehan and Haire 1999;Dumas and Haynie 2012;Boyd 2015). 3 As a result, we might expect that private companies will be relatively advantaged in litigation when they are facing one-shot litigants like prisoners.…”