Last week, we analyzed whether a more active bench at oral argument suggests that the case is likely to be under submission longer. We found that there was no consistent, strong correlation between total questions and days under submission, either on the civil or criminal side.
This week, we ask a different question: does a
Yesterday, we investigated whether more questions at oral argument meant a longer wait for the opinion by tracking the correlation between total questions and lag time. Today, we apply the same test to the Court’s criminal cases.
We report the correlation between days from the oral argument to decision and total number of questions in
For several weeks, we’ve been evaluating what we can infer from the pattern of the Illinois Supreme Court’s questions in civil and criminal cases. This week, we turn to a new question: does an active bench mean you’ll be waiting a longer time for the opinion? One can easily imagine that the answer might be
Yesterday, we continued our ongoing analysis of the Court’s oral arguments by looking at whether the margin in number of questions between the parties tended to be larger when the Court was unanimous. We theorized that such an effect might be the result of the entire Court concentrating on one side, as opposed to evenly
Over the past few weeks, we’ve been taking a close look at what can be learned from the Illinois Supreme Court’s oral arguments since 2008. We’ve shown that the Court tends to ask slightly more questions of appellants in civil cases, and definitely averages more questions to appellants in criminal cases. We’ve disproven the common
Yesterday, we compared the average level of questioning in civil cases since 2008 for winning and losing appellants, and winning and losing appellees, year by year, showing that in nearly every year, losing parties averaged more questions than winners. Then we calculated the odds of winning, based upon the comparison between how many questions you
All appellate specialists, without exception, prefer a “hot bench” at oral argument. The sole reason for you to be there is to find out what, if anything, is troubling the Court about your case, and try to answer their concerns. But the paradox of a hot bench is this: as I told an interviewer a
Yesterday, we looked for evidence that questioning at oral argument is driven by a desire to persuade a Justice’s colleagues by comparing the average questions to each side in non-unanimous versus unanimous decisions on the civil docket. Today, we repeat the comparison, looking at the Court’s criminal cases between 2008 and 2015. On the criminal
There are many theories among the appellate bar about what sparks questions from the court during oral argument. One of the most frequently heard theories is that the Justices are talking to each other – that Justices are raising points which are troubling their colleagues, or trying to expose what they see as problems with
Yesterday, we continued our analysis of the Illinois Supreme Court’s oral arguments by analyzing whether the Court generally asked more questions of appellants or appellees in civil cases. Today, we turn our attention to the Court’s criminal docket.
Between 2008 and 2015, the Court asked 5,057 questions of appellants in criminal, quasi-criminal and juvenile matters,