The prevailing expert opinion is that jury verdicts are largely immune to appellate revision. Using a database that combines all federal civil trials and appeals decided since 1988, we find that jury trials, as a group, are in fact not so special on appeal. But the data do show that defendants succeed more than plaintiffs on appeal from civil trials, and especially from jury trials. Defendants appealing their losses after trial by jury obtain reversals at a 31% rate, while losing plaintiffs succeed in only 13% of their appeals from jury trials. Both descriptive analyses of the results and more formal regression models dispel explanations based on selection of cases and instead support an explanation based on appellate judges\u27 attitudes...
Every state provides appellate review of criminal judgments, yet little research examines which fact...
Professors Clermont and Eisenberg conducted a systematic analysis of appellate court behavior and re...
Although few dispute the appellate process\u27s centrality to justice systems, especially in the cri...
The prevailing expert opinion is that jury verdicts are largely immune to appellate revision. Usin...
Multiple studies find that plaintiffs who lose at trial and subsequently appeal are less successful ...
Multiple studies find that plaintiffs who lose at trial and subsequently appeal are less successful ...
Prior federal civil appellate studies show that appeals courts overturn jury verdicts more than benc...
Prior federal and state civil appeals studies show that appeals courts overturn jury verdicts more t...
A recent study of appellate outcomes reveals that defendants succeed significantly more often than p...
Pity the civil jury, seen by some as the sickest organ of a sick system. Yet the jury has always bee...
Federal data sets covering district court and appellate court civil cases for cases terminating in f...
Two findings dominate prior empirical studies of federal civil appeals. First, appeals courts are mo...
This paper challenges the commonly held idea that the appeals process lowers the occurrence of legal...
Every state provides appellate review of criminal judgments, yet little research examines which fact...
Professors Clermont and Eisenberg conducted a systematic analysis of appellate court behavior and re...
Although few dispute the appellate process\u27s centrality to justice systems, especially in the cri...
The prevailing expert opinion is that jury verdicts are largely immune to appellate revision. Usin...
Multiple studies find that plaintiffs who lose at trial and subsequently appeal are less successful ...
Multiple studies find that plaintiffs who lose at trial and subsequently appeal are less successful ...
Prior federal civil appellate studies show that appeals courts overturn jury verdicts more than benc...
Prior federal and state civil appeals studies show that appeals courts overturn jury verdicts more t...
A recent study of appellate outcomes reveals that defendants succeed significantly more often than p...
Pity the civil jury, seen by some as the sickest organ of a sick system. Yet the jury has always bee...
Federal data sets covering district court and appellate court civil cases for cases terminating in f...
Two findings dominate prior empirical studies of federal civil appeals. First, appeals courts are mo...
This paper challenges the commonly held idea that the appeals process lowers the occurrence of legal...
Every state provides appellate review of criminal judgments, yet little research examines which fact...
Professors Clermont and Eisenberg conducted a systematic analysis of appellate court behavior and re...
Although few dispute the appellate process\u27s centrality to justice systems, especially in the cri...