For the last two weeks, we’ve been looking at the court-wide data for questions at oral argument. We discussed the academic research into oral argument questions, which demonstrates that at the U.S. Supreme Court, the party which will lose the case generally gets the most questions. We then looked at the data for the Illinois
Last week, we reviewed the academic literature studying oral argument analytics, and then compared the data for civil and criminal cases, both affirmances and reversals, to the outcome of those earlier studies. This week, we’re digging deeper on that work. For last week’s comparison, we aggregated outright reversals and split decisions: “affirmed in part, reversed in part.” Now let’s disaggregate – compare outright reversals to split decisions.
Continue Reading Can You Predict a Split Decision in Civil Cases at the Illinois Supreme Court After Oral Argument?
Yesterday, we disaggregated the data on oral arguments in civil cases where there is a partial or complete reversal. Today, we’re looking at the criminal cases.
Continue Reading Can You Predict a Split Decision in Criminal Cases at the Illinois Supreme Court After Oral Argument?
Last time, we surveyed the academic research applying analytics techniques to appellate oral arguments and then reviewed the data for civil arguments at the Supreme Court since 2008. In this post, we’re reviewing the data for the same period on the criminal side of the docket.
Continue Reading Can a Winner Be Predicted In Illinois Supreme Court Criminal Case Oral Arguments?
Today, we begin a new subject in our ongoing analytics study of the Court’s decision making – oral arguments. Although the academic community has been producing analytics studies of appellate decision making for a century, the analytics study of oral arguments is a much more recent development.
Continue Reading Can a Winner Be Predicted In Illinois Supreme Court Civil Case Oral Arguments?
Yesterday, we addressed the court-wide data for the oral arguments in the criminal cases decided last year. Now, let’s dig down to the Justice-by-Justice numbers.
Long-time readers will know that historically, the most active questioner on the Court during oral arguments tends to be Justice Thomas. But last year on the criminal side, Justice Theis
In our last two posts, we took a close look at what the oral arguments data revealed for civil cases the Court decided last year. Today we’ll be looking at the Court’s criminal decisions for 2018.
On the civil side, the Court’s total questions were almost evenly split between appellants and appellees. The criminal side
Last time, we began reviewing the Court’s oral arguments in civil cases decided in 2018. This time, we’re finishing that review.
Who was the heaviest questioner? Once again, Justice Thomas led, asking 201 questions in all. Dividing the arguments by segment, we find that Justice Theis was the highest questioner for appellants’ initial argument, asking
This time, we’re tracking the oral arguments for the Court’s cases decided in 2018, beginning with civil cases. If you’re a new reader of our blog, we reviewed the history of oral argument analytics here.
Among the civil cases decided in 2018, the Court asked 285 questions of appellant – opening segment and rebuttal
Last time, we looked at whether the Court’s lag time – from the allowance of a petition for leave to appeal to oral argument, and from oral argument to decision – gives litigants a hint of what the Court’s decision is likely to be. We showed that although there’s no consistent relationship between lag time