Yesterday, we analyzed whether it’s possible, based on all oral arguments in criminal cases between 2009 and 2016, to infer from watching Justice Kilbride’s question patterns in criminal cases how he’s voting, and whether he’s writing an opinion. Today, we ask the same question based on whether or not Justice Kilbride asks the first question.
Last week, we analyzed the pattern of Justice Kilbride’s questions in oral arguments in civil cases, asking whether it’s possible to infer who Justice Kilbride will vote for and whether or not he’s writing an opinion. This week, we do the same for the Court’s criminal cases between 2008 and 2016.
Overall, Justice Kilbride has
Yesterday, we asked whether we can infer anything about Justice Kilbride’s vote and whether he’s writing an opinion, based on the pattern of his questions in oral argument. Today, we ask a slightly different question – can we infer anything from whether or not Justice Kilbride asks the first question in a civil case?
Justice
Over the last two weeks, we’ve reviewed Justice Freeman’s question patterns in civil and criminal cases. This week, we’ll be reviewing Justice Kilbride’s patterns with his questioning in civil cases.
Justice Kilbride has heard oral argument in 127 cases where he voted with the majority in an affirmance. He wrote the majority opinion in eight
For the past several weeks, we’ve been doing a quick review of oral arguments in cases decided by the Illinois Supreme Court in 2015, evaluating whether the Justices’ questioning patterns differ from their civil arguments. Today, we finish our aggregate statistics and make a start on our Justice-by-Justice comparisons.
In Table 121 below, we see
Yesterday, we continued our Justice-by-Justice review of question patterns in oral arguments at the Illinois Supreme Court, beginning our two-day look at Justice Thomas L. Kilbride. Our goal is to explore what we can infer about how each Justice might vote, and whether he or she is writing an opinion, from the Justice’s questioning. Today,
Last week, we began our detailed look at the individual Justices’ question patterns during oral argument. You’ll recall we began by dividing 233 oral arguments in civil cases into the four possible voting scenarios – the Justice voting with the majority to reverse or affirm, and the Justice voting in the minority in either case.