Petition for Leave to Appeal

I’m always surprised when I encounter litigators who dismiss litigation analytics as a passing fad.  In fact, as shown in the reprint post below, it’s a century-long academic enterprise which has produced many hundreds of studies conclusively proving through tens of thousands of pages of analysis the value of data analytics in better understanding how

The Illinois Supreme Court Review recently marked its sixth anniversary.  In April, the California Supreme Court Review turns five.

So I thought it was time for a first: cross-posted reprints from the earliest days of the blogs.  My early attempts to provide context for the work and to answer the question I often heard in

Now we turn our attention to the criminal docket.  First, we review the data for complete reversal – divided decisions from the Court of Appeal versus unanimous decisions.  In six of the past thirty-one years, the reversal rate for unanimous Court of Appeal decisions has exceeded that for divided ones.  The rest of the time,

Last time, we reviewed the year-by-year percentage of the Supreme Court’s civil caseload that is drawn from Appellate Court cases with a dissenter to evaluate the claim that a petition for leave to appeal from a unanimous decision is a hopeless exercise.  This time, we’re looking at the Court’s criminal cases.  Just like last time,

Last week, we addressed the frequently heard claim that seeking Supreme Court review of an unpublished decision from the Appellate Court is a hopeless task.  This week, we’re addressing a similar claim – that the Supreme Court doesn’t review unanimous decisions.  Below, we’ll address the data from civil cases, and in our next post, we’ll

Last time, we demonstrated that notwithstanding the frequently heard claim that seeking review of a Rule 23 (unpublished) decision from the Appellate Court is a hopeless task, anywhere from ten to forty percent of the Court’s civil docket has consisted of Rule 23 orders for the past thirty years.  So what about criminal cases?

Like most sectors of the bar, there are certain items of “conventional wisdom” in the appellate bar that everyone has heard (or said themselves).  In both Illinois and California, one of those claims is that it’s pointless to seek Supreme Court review of a decision that wasn’t published by the lower court.  After all, if

Yesterday, we showed that for the most part, the percentage of non-unanimous Appellate Court decisions on the Supreme Court’s docket is about the same on the civil and criminal dockets.  Today, we’re asking the companion question – how important is publication at the Appellate Court?  Last week, we showed that roughly sixty to eighty percent

Last week, we reviewed the data for what percentage of the Court’s civil cases had a dissenter or were published below.  This week, we’re looking at the same question for the criminal side.

Between 1990 and 1994, nearly as many criminal cases as civil cases had a dissenter below – 21.74% (1990), 25.86% (1991), 11.96%

Yesterday, we showed that the Supreme Court regularly reviews roughly three civil cases which were unanimous decisions at the Appellate Court for every decision which had a dissenter below.  Today, we’re looking at a similar question – how often does the Court review unpublished decisions?

Between 1990 and 1995, the share of published cases below