Photo of Kirk Jenkins

Kirk Jenkins brings a wealth of experience to his appellate practice, which focuses on antitrust and constitutional law, as well as products liability, RICO, price fixing, information sharing among competitors and class certification. In addition to handling appeals, he also regularly works with trial teams to ensure that important issues are properly presented and preserved for appellate review.  Mr. Jenkins is a pioneer in the application of data analytics to appellate decision-making and writes two analytics blogs, the California Supreme Court Review and the Illinois Supreme Court Review, as well as regularly writing for various legal publications.

7157055718_4bc129954f_zWith one seat on the Court switching from Democratic to Republican hands as a result of the 2004 election, a centrist majority of Chief Justice Thomas, Garman and Karmeier began to emerge, often joined by Justice Fitzgerald. As a result, with the exception of 2006 (when the unanimity rate abruptly dipped to 57.4%), the Court

5139407571_1c81d07a8c_zFor the past two weeks, we’ve been taking an intensive look at the voting dynamics at the Illinois Supreme Court in civil cases. Today, we further probe our tentative conclusions by looking for swing votes on the Court. How often was each Justice in the majority when the Court was divided?

Table 32 A

The data largely confirms

4446461866_2a2822cd2d_zLast week, we began our study of voting dynamics on the Illinois Supreme Court since 2000 by looking at agreement rates in non-unanimous civil cases between 2000-2004. Once again, to minimize extreme swings from one year to the next, we report three-year floating averages.

With two plurality voting blocs on the Court during these years,

3002112985_80b5a719b1_zFinally, we reach the most important information of all about the Court from the viewpoint of an appellate lawyer: data about the Justices’ voting patterns. Because unanimity rates overstate the degree of agreement on the Court, we focus on voting patterns in the Court’s non-unanimous civil decisions. Because the number of non-unanimous civil decisions in

6883885357_85363f726e_zLast week, we began the final phase of our review of the Justices’ opinion writing with a look at the majority and concurring opinions for the years 2010 through 2014. Today, we turn to the Justices’ dissents.

Between 2010 and 2014, the Justices filed dissents at a comparable rate to the 2005-2009 period. Chief Justice

4515769681_a7461030aa_zYesterday, we continued our close look at the Justices’ writing during our second five year period with a review of the special concurrences between 2005 and 2009. Today, we turn to the Justices’ dissents.

Given that special concurrences are generally written to express at least mild disagreement with the majority’s views, it is not surprising

5998737609_6e8f69fed7_zLast week, we continued our close look at the individual Justices’ writing with a review of the majority opinions in civil cases between 2005 and 2009. This week, we consider which Justices wrote the longest and shortest (and most frequent) special concurrences and dissents during those years.

Between 2005 and 2009, Justice Kilbride wrote the