Where Do the California Supreme Court’s Civil Cases Originate (Part 7)?

This week, we conclude our series of posts on the originating jurisdictions, year-by-year, of the California Supreme Court’s civil docket – not the first trial court, but the council, agency or department where the case began.  Today, we look at the years 2011 through 2013.

As usual, in 2011, the Los Angeles County Superior Court led the docket, originating fifteen of the Court’s civil cases.  Two cases apiece began in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, the San Francisco, San Diego and Orange County Superior Courts, and the State Water Resources Board.  One case apiece originated in the Workers Compensation Appeals Board, the Public Employment Relations Board, and the Superior Courts for Ventura, San Bernardino and Alameda counties.

We report the data for 2012 in Table 245 below.  For 2012, nine cases began in the Los Angeles County Superior Court.  Three each started in the Orange and San Diego County Superior Courts.  Two apiece originated in Santa Clara, Sacramento and Alameda counties.  One each started in San Francisco County, Riverside County, Stanislaus County and San Mateo County.

Finally, in 2013, twelve cases originated in Los Angeles County.  Two cases apiece began in the United States District Court for the Central District of California and the San Francisco and Santa Clara County Superior Courts.  One case each began at the Workers Compensation Appeals Board, the Los Angeles County Employee Relations Committee, the Santa Cruz, Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardino, Orange, Contra Costa, Marin and Fresno County Superior Courts, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, the State Board of Equalization, the Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority and the Los Angeles County Board of Education.

Join us back here as we conclude our series on the originating jurisdictions of the Court’s civil docket.

Image courtesy of Pixabay by TravelerbyCard (no changes).

Where Do the California Supreme Court’s Civil Cases Originate (Part 6)?

Today, we continue our ongoing series of posts about the originating jurisdictions of the California Supreme Court’s civil docket with the years 2009 and 2010.

The data for 2009 is reported in Table 242 below.  That year, Los Angeles County originated twelve cases.  San Diego originated five.  Orange County produced four, San Francisco County three, and Monterey and Riverside counties two apiece.  The following jurisdictions produced one case each: Yolo, San Luis Obispo, San Joaquin, Marin, Mendocino and Sonoma counties, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors, the United District Courts for the Northern, Central and Southern Districts of California, the Public Employee Relations Board, the Workers Compensation Appeals Board, the State Personnel Board and the State Water Resources Control Board.

Los Angeles County Superior Court originated eleven civil cases in 2010.  Four cases began in the United States District Court for the Central District of California.  Orange, San Francisco and Santa Clara counties produced three cases apiece.  Sacramento and Alameda counties produced two cases apiece.  The following jurisdictions produced one case each: the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, the Public Employment Relations Board, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the Los Angeles County Assessment Appeals Board, and the following counties: Yolo, Sonoma, Solano, Marin, San Luis Obispo, San Joaquin, San Diego and Monterey.

Join us back here next Thursday as we continue our analysis of the Court’s civil docket.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Moonjazz (no changes).

Where Do the California Supreme Court’s Civil Cases Originate (Part 5)?

For the past two weeks, we’ve been reviewing the originating jurisdictions – not the first trial court, but the first authority, whether agency, council or board – for the California Supreme Court’s civil docket between 1994 and 2016.  Today, we’ve reached 2006.

Table 239 reports the data for 2006.  The Los Angeles Superior Court originated fifteen cases.  Sacramento County originated five cases, San Francisco County four and Alameda County three.  The Franchise Tax Board and San Bernardino County originated two cases apiece.  The following jurisdictions originated one case each: the Goleta City Council, the San Francisco Civil Service Commission, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Kern County, the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, the San Diego Civil Service Commission, San Diego, Sierra and Humboldt counties, the Claremont Police Department, Santa Barbara County, the Board of Trustees of the California State University, Inyo, Shasta and San Luis Obispo counties, the Assessment Appeals Board No. 1 for the County of Los Angeles, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors, the Tulare County Employees Retirement Association and the State Water Resources Control Board.

We report the data for 2007 in Table 240 below.  Seventeen cases originated in Los Angeles County.  Four began in San Diego County, three in San Francisco, San Bernardino, Sacramento and Orange counties, and two each in Santa Clara County and the Workers Compensation Appeals Board.  One case apiece originated at the National Labor Relations Board, the City of Oakland Public Records Act Monitor, the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, Contra Costa, Imperial, San Joaquin, Santa Barbara, Kings, Merced, Santa Barbara, Kings, Merced, Shasta, Solano, Riverside and Sutter counties, the Tulare County Council, the Solano County Airport Land Use Commission, the California Department of Motor Vehicles, the California Labor Commissioner, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors and the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

We report the data for 2008 in Table 241 below.  Thirteen cases originated in Los Angeles County.  Eight began in San Diego.  Three started in Sacramento County and two in San Francisco County.  One case each originated in the Los Angeles Police Department, the West Hollywood City Council, the Circuit Courts of Ventura, Alameda, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Joaquin County, the California Department of Fish and Game, the Santa Clara County Open Space Authority, the Workers Compensation Appeals Board, the California Environmental Protection Agency, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the California Labor Commissioner.

Join us back here tomorrow as we review the Court’s civil cases for 2009 and 2010.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Bob Dass (no changes).

 

Where Do the California Supreme Court’s Civil Cases Originate (Part 4)?

314115639_622b2ff12c_z

Yesterday, we continued our review of the originating jurisdiction for the California Supreme Court’s civil docket – the original agency, department, council or court.  Today, we continue our review.

In 2003, thirteen cases originated in Los Angeles County.  Five began in San Francisco, three each in Santa Clara, Sacramento and San Bernardino county, and two in San Diego, Orange County and Contra Costa county.  The court heard one case each in Fresno, Riverside, Santa Barbara, Alameda and Kern counties, the Workers Compensation Appeals Board, the Commission on State Mandates, the United States District Court for the Central District of California, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, and the West Sonoma County Union High School District.

Table 236

In 2004, twenty cases from LA were decided.  The court heard seven cases from San Francisco, four each from San Diego and Orange counties, two from San Francisco,  and one each from Riverside, Contra Costa, Kings, Tulare, Yolo and Shasta counties, and the Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board, the Department of Motor Vehicles, the Commission on State Mandates, the United States District Court for the Central District of California, the Department of Industrial Relations, the California Water Agencies Joint Powers Insurance Authority and the County of Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors.

Table 237

In 2005, the Court heard sixteen cases which originated in LA County Superior Court.  The court heard five cases from San Francisco, four from San Diego and three each from Santa Clara, Sacramento and Riverside counties.  The Court heard one case apiece from Marin, Orange, Santa Barbara, Kern, Stanislaus and El Dorado counties, the Workers Compensation Appeals Board, the United States District Court for the Central District of California, and the Department of Personnel Administration.

Table 238

Join us back here next Thursday as we turn to the next phase of our analysis.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Tony’s pics (no changes).

Where Do the California Supreme Court’s Civil Cases Originate (Part 3)?

16592344774_e39b5912e8_z

Last week, we reviewed the data on the originating jurisdictions of the California Supreme Court’s civil cases between 1995 and 1999.  This week, we review the data from 2000 through 2005.

The Los Angeles Superior Court originated eighteen cases in 2000.  The court heard six cases which arose from San Francisco, three from Santa Clara and two each from Sacramento County, San Diego and Riverside.  The Court heard one case apiece from Sonoma, Marin, San Bernardino, San Mateo, San Luis Obispo, Tulare and Monterey County, the Workers Compensation Appeals Board, the California Medical Board, the California Labor Commissioner, the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission, The City of Lodi City Council, the Malibu Municipal Court, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California and the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

Table 233

Thirteen cases originated in the Los Angeles Superior Court in 2001.  Seven cases came from Orange County.  Four cases came from San Diego County, three each from San Francisco, three from Kern County and the United States District Court from the Central District of California.  Two cases apiece arose from Sacramento and San Bernardino counties and the Workers Compensation Appeals Board.  The court heard one case each from the State Board of Equalization, Marin, Riverside, Santa Barbara, Kings and San Joaquin counties, and the State Board of Equalization, the Commission on State Mandates, the Sierra Madre City Council, the Clovis Mobile Home Rent Review Commission and the State Commissioner of Insurance.

Table 234

In 2002, Los Angeles produced a dozen cases.  San Francisco produced five cases, Orange County produced three, and Santa Clara, Sacramento, San Diego, Fresno, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing and the United States District Court for the Central District of California produced two cases each.  The court heard one case each from Sonoma, Santa Barbara, San Mateo and Contra Costa counties, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, the San Francisco Board of Permit Appeals, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California and the City of Manhattan Beach.

Table 235

Join us back here tomorrow as we turn to the Court’s record in 2003 and following.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Ian D. Keating (no changes).

Where Do the Supreme Court’s Civil Cases Originate (Part 2)?

15765008412_7eb2e25223_z

Yesterday, we began our year-by-year review of where the Court’s civil cases have originated since 1994.  By doing so, we can see trends in the administrative and executive agencies where the Court’s cases come from.  Last time, we reviewed the data for 1994, 1995 and 1996.  Today, we’re looking at the years 1997-1999.

For 1997, the Court heard sixteen civil cases which began in Los Angeles Superior Court.  The Court heard three each from Sacramento and San Mateo counties, and two cases apiece from San Diego, Orange, Fresno, Riverside, Solano, Alameda and Stanislaus counties, as well as two from the Workers Compensation Commission.  The Court decided one case each from Santa Clara, San Francisco, Marin, Ventura, San Luis Obispo and Kings counties, the Department of Motor Vehicles, the Governing Board of the Rialto Unified School District, the City of Piedmont School District, the City of Piedmont Planning Commission, the Santa Monica Rent Control Board, the Board of Retirement of the Ventura County Employees Association, the Kern County Department of Planning and Development Services and the Commission on State Mandates.

Table 230

We report the data for 1998 in Table 231.  That year, the Court decided fifteen civil cases which began in Los Angeles County Superior Court.  The Court heard four cases apiece from San Francisco, San Diego, and Riverside counties, three from Sacramento and Alameda counties and the Workers Compensation Commission and two each from Santa Clara, Orange and Solano counties.  The Court decided one civil case which originated in the following counties: Lake, San Bernardino, San Mateo, Contra Costa, Ventura and Kern, as well as the State Board of Equalization, the California Coastal Commission, the Labor Commission and the Board of Architectural Examiners.

Table 231

In 1999, the Court decided eighteen cases from Los Angeles.  The Court heard four cases from Santa Clara, three from San Diego and two each from San Francisco, Orange and San Bernardino counties. The Court heard one case from Sonoma, Lake, Marin, Santa Barbara, Alameda, San Luis Obispo and Tuolomne counties, as well as one apiece from the following governmental entities: the State Board of Equalization, the Workers Compensation Commission, the Sacramento County Department of Health and Human Services, the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission, the San Francisco Airports Commission, the City of Angels City Council, the Santa Monica Rent Control Board and the state Commission on Professional Competence.

Table 232

Join us back here next Thursday as we continue our review of the originating jurisdictions of the Court’s civil cases.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Keoni Cabral (no changes).

Where Do the Supreme Court’s Civil Cases Originate (Part 1)?

6953330797_140b11a2b0_z

In our recent expansion of Sedgwick’s California Supreme Court database, one of the variables we added was the originating jurisdiction.  Given that the Court always has a significant number of administrative mandate cases, originating jurisdiction is a more precise measure of where the Court’s cases are coming from than solely tracking the original trial court.

The data from 1994 is reported in Table 227 below.  The Court handled fifteen civil cases originating in the Los Angeles Superior Court.  The Court decided four cases which originated in Orange County, three from San Francisco and two each from Santa Clara, San Diego, Marin, Fresno and Riverside County.  The Court heard one case each which originated with the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, the State Board of Equalization, the State Fair Political Practices Commission, the Trinity County Board of Supervisors, the Commission on Judicial Performance, the Governing Board of the Marin Community College District, the State Board of Forestry, the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors, the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board.  The Court also heard one case each from Sonoma, San Diego, Lake, Santa Barbara, San Bernardino, Solano, San Mateo, Contra Costa and Ventura counties.

Table 227

In 1995, the Court heard fifteen cases which originated in Los Angeles County Superior Court, seven in San Francisco, three each in Santa Clara and Sacramento counties, two in Santa Barbara, San Mateo, Contra Costa and Alameda counties.  Four cases originated in the Commission on Judicial Performance.  One each arose in San Diego, Marin, Orange, Riverside, Solano and San Benito counties, as well as the Fair Political Practices Commission, the Public Utilities Commission, the California Personnel Board, the Santa Ana City Council, the Department of Education, the Napa County Board of Supervisors, the San Francisco Tax Collector and the Air Resources Board.

Table 228

For 1996, the Court heard six civil cases which originated in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, three in San Diego and two each in San Francisco, Orange, San Mateo and Mendocino counties.  The court heard one case each from Sacramento, Sutter and Kern counties, the Industrial Welfare Commission, the Board of Mining and Geology, the Department of Motor Vehicles, the Workers Compensation Commission, the Medical Board, the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, the Department of Health Services, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, and the Culver City Council.

Table 229

Join us back here tomorrow as we look at the originating jurisdictions for the Court’s docket for the years 1997-1999.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Chad McDonald (no changes).

How Have Public Entities Fared in Civil Cases (Part 2 – 2006-2016)?

2443479894_467217cf71_z

Last time, we looked at public entities’ winning percentage in civil cases at the California Supreme Court between 1994 and 2005.  Today, we look at the second half of our study period – how did public entities fare between 2006 and 2016?

Public entities have done even better during these years than they had in our earlier period.  Only once in the eleven years between 2006 and 2016 did either public entity petitioners or respondents fall below a winning percentage of 50%.  In 2006, public entity petitioners won 75% of their cases, while respondents won 52.38%.  In 2007, petitioners won three-quarters of their cases, while respondents won sixty percent.  In 2008, public entity petitioners won 71.43% of their cases, while respondents won half of theirs.  In 2009, public entities won five cases as petitioner, with one partial affirmance/reversal, while respondents won only 55.56% of their cases.  In 2010, the sides were roughly equal – public entity petitioners won 55.56% of their cases, while respondents won 57.14%.  For 2011, public entities won three quarters of their cases, while respondents evenly split theirs.  In 2012, petitioners won five cases with one split decision, while respondents won 83.33% of theirs.

Between 2013 and 2015, the Court granted relatively few petitions filed by public entities.  In 2013, public entity petitioners lost both of their cases.  Respondents won half of their six cases.  In 2014, petitioners won both their cases, while respondents won two-thirds of theirs.  In 2015, petitioners won two-thirds of their cases.  Respondents won half.  Finally, in 2016, petitioners won seven of their nine cases for a winning percentage of 77.78%.  But public entity respondents managed to win only one of their five cases last year for a winning percentage of 20%.

Table 226

Join us back here Thursday as we turn to our next issue in our ongoing research – tracking the originating jurisdictions of the Court’s civil cases.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Peasap (no changes).

How Have Public Entities Fared in Civil Cases? (Part I – 1994-2005)

4982842116_2e09d6b4f5_z

Last week, we looked at how defendants have fared in criminal cases.  Of course, in a sense that amounts to asking how prosecutors are doing.  So this week, we ask the flip side of that question – how have public entities fared in civil cases between 1994 and 2016?

In Table 225, we report the data for the years 1994 through 2005, reporting the percentage of cases with a clear winner – either an affirmance or reversal – which public entities won.  For the most part, public entities have been faring quite well.  In only two of these twelve years did public entities win less than half of their cases as petitioner.  Public entity respondents fell below fifty percent in only three of twelve years – quite a number given that in most years, the Court reverses fifty to sixty percent of the cases it hears.

In 1994, public entity petitioners got reversals in 83.33% of their cases.  Respondents prevailed 55.56% of the time.  The numbers flipped in 1995 – petitioners won only 55%, but respondents won 75% of their cases.  In 1996, public entity petitioners won all six of the cases with a clear winner.  Respondents won only 37.5% of their cases.  The following year, petitioners won 77.78% (seven of nine, with five split decisions), and respondents won even more often – 83.33% of their cases.  In 1998, both sides were quite close – petitioners won 61.54% of their cases and respondents won 63.64%.  In 1999, petitioners were 4-3 at the Court for a winning percentage of 57.14% (about the average for private entities).  Public entity respondents had a rough time of it, though, winning only 36.36% of their cases.  In 2000, it was petitioners’ turn, winning only 28.57% of their cases.  But respondents won three-quarters of theirs.

2001 was a comparatively rough year at the Court for public entities – petitioners won only 57.14% of their cases, and respondents won only 28.57% of their cases.  But things turned around the following year – petitioners won seven of eight for a winning percentage of 87.5%, and petitioners won 71.43%.  Meanwhile, public entity respondents won only five of twelve cases, for a winning percentage of 41.67%.  In 2004, public entity parties fared about as well as private entities did – petitioners won 60% of their cases, and respondents won half of theirs.  Finally, in 2005, public entity petitioners only won 28.57% of their cases, while respondents won 57.14%.

Table 225

Join us back here next time as we look at the years 2006-2016.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Nan Palmero (no changes).

Are Defendants Winning Criminal Appeals More Often (Part 2 – 2006-2016)?

14430214062_06cc7e3dda_z

Yesterday, we looked at whether defendants are winning a higher fraction of appeals in criminal cases between 1994 and 2005.  Today, we’re looking at the years 2006 through 2016.

In 2010, defendants won eleven criminal cases.  In 2012, defendants won ten cases.  Beginning in 2014, defendants have won more cases each year – twelve in 2014, thirteen in 2015 and 14 in 2016.  Defendants had mixed results in five cases in 2016, four in 2007, 2010, 2012 and 2015.  Defendants had partial wins in three cases in 2006 and 2013, and in two cases in 2014.  Defendants had one partial win in 2008, and none in 2009.

Defendants lost 63 cases in 2012.  They lost 51 in 2007, 56 in 2008, 53 in 2009 and 58 in 2010.  Defendants lost 43 cases in 2006, 44 in 2011 and 41 each in 2013 and 2014.  Defendants lost 33 cases in 2016 and 26 in 2015.

Table 223

Defendants won between ten and twenty percent of criminal cases in 2006 and 2008-2013.  Every year since, the winning percentage for defendants has increased, to 21.82% in 2014, 30.23% in 2015 and 26.92% in 2016.  Defendants won 13.21% of their cases in 2006, 13.64% in 2008, 13.11% in 2009, 15.07% in 2009 and 2010, 13.73% in 2011, 12.99% in 2012 and 12% in 2013.

Defendants have scored partial wins in 9.3% of cases in 2015 and 9.62% in 2016.  Defendants have had partial wins in 6.56% of cases in 2007, 5.66% in 2006, 5.48% in 2010 and 5.19% in 2012.  Defendants have fallen below a seventy percent losing percentage only twice during this period – 60.46% in 2015 and 63.46% in 2016.  Defendants lost 75.93% of their criminal appeals in 2014 and 79.45% in 2010.  Defendants have lost at least 80% of their cases in seven years – 2006 (81.13%), 2007 (83.61%), 2008 (84.85%); 2009 (86.89%); 2011 (86.27%); 2012 (81.82%) and 2013 (82%).

Table 224

Join us back here next Thursday as we turn our attention to the next facet of our analysis of the Court’s decision making.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Peter Alfred Hess (no changes).

LexBlog