How Have Tort Defendants Fared at the Supreme Court Since 2010?

As the philosophical composition of the Court has shifted in recent years, tort defendants have seen their won-loss record fall. From 2010 to 2019, defendants have won 18 cases while losing 22. Defendants won only three of fifteen cases from 2013 through 2016 and five of nine from 2017 to 2019.

During the decade, tort defendants have successfully defended Court of Appeal wins in only eight of twenty cases. From 2011 to 2016, defendants won only two of ten cases which they had won below. Since 2017, defendants have won only four of seven.

Interestingly, in terms of defendants’ winning percentage since 2010, they have fared a little better attacking Court of Appeal decisions they lost than defending their wins. For the decade, defendants have split decisions in taking their losses to the Court – winning ten and losing ten. In 2011 and 2012, defendants won seven of eight such cases, but in the years since, they have won only two of eleven.

Join us back here next Thursday as we begin our look at the individual Justices’ voting records in tort cases.

Image courtesy of Pixabay by Skeeze (no changes).

How Did Tort Defendants Fare at the Supreme Court, 2000-2009?

Between 2000 and 2009, tort defendants continued to fare well before the Supreme Court, winning 44 cases while losing 32. Defendants were 9-5 in 2002, 6-2 in 2003 and 8-4 in 2007. On the other hand, defendants won only one out of seven decisions in 2005.

Tort defendants who prevailed at the Court of Appeal continued to have good success in preserving those wins, winning 21 cases while losing 12 during the decade. Defendants won five of seven cases in 2002 and four of five in 2007. Defendants were at or close to .500 for most of the rest of decade.

For the decade, tort defendants won 23 cases which they had previously lost at the Court of Appeal, losing 20. There were only a few lopsided years in the decade; defendants won four of five in 2003, lost all four cases in 2005 and won eight of fourteen from 2007 to 2009.

Join us back here tomorrow as we address the data for the years 2010 to 2019.

Image courtesy of Pixabay by Skeeze (no changes).

How Did Tort Defendants Fare Before the Supreme Court 1990-1999?

Today and next week, we’re reviewing the Court’s year by year record in tort cases – what’s the defendants’ won-loss record, how often were tort defendant wins from the Court of Appeal affirmed and losses reversed. In Table 1255, we report insurers’ yearly won-loss record from 1990 to 1999. What’s evident from the data is that tort defendants were doing quite well from 1990 to 1993, but for the rest of the decade, the numbers corrected noticeably. From 1990 to 1993, defendants won 20, losing only 10. Strike out their 1-6 won-loss record in 1991 and those numbers are even more lopsided (defendants were 4-0 in 1990 and 9-1 in 1993). But from 1994 to 1999, tort defendants won 35 cases while losing 28. So what this means for the decade as a whole is that defendants won 55 cases, losing 38 – a winning percentage of .591.

In our next table, we show the affirmances and reversals of decisions won by tort defendants at the Court of Appeal. We notice immediately that there are no lopsided years in terms of wins and losses; winning insurers were breaking even nearly every year. For the decade, insurers successfully defended 16 wins from the Court of Appeal while losing 19 of those cases.

Of course, this means that tort defendants were faring quite well during the nineties in terms of obtaining reversal in cases they lost at the Court of Appeal. Indeed, from 1992 to 1995, defendants who lost below received 20 reversals of those losses while seeing only four affirmances. From 1997 to 1999, tort defendants who lost below won 15 cases while losing 9. For the entire decade, tort defendants who lost below won 36 cases, losing only 21.

Join us back here next Tuesday as we review the overall data for tort cases from 2000 to 2019.

Image courtesy of Flickr by TPSDave (no changes).

How Did Justices Kruger and Groban Vote in Cases Involving Insurer Parties?

Since she joined the Court in 2015, Justice Kruger has participated in six cases involving insurer parties, splitting her votes down the middle – three for the insurer party, three against.

Justice Kruger has participated in three cases won by the insurers at the Court of Appeal, voting to affirm one insurer win and voting to reverse twice.

Justice Kruger has participated in only one case lost by the insurer at the Court of Appeal, voting to reverse the insurer’s loss.

Justice Groban has participated in only one case involving an insurer party since joining the Court early last year, voting for the insurer’s position. That case was a certified question appeal; Justice Groban has not participated in an insurer win or loss from the Court of Appeal.

Join us back here tomorrow as we turn our attention to the Court’s tort cases.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Kokomo Cole (no changes).

How Did Justice Cuellar Vote in Civil Cases With Insurer Parties?

So far we’ve reviewed four Justices’ voting records in civil cases with insurers as named parties. Today, we’re looking at the data for Justice Cuellar.

Like Justice Liu, Justice Cuellar has split his votes right down the middle on the six insurer cases he’s participated in – three votes for the insurer’s position, three votes against.

Justice Cuellar has voted to affirm in one case won by the insurer at the Court of Appeal and voted to reverse twice.

Justice Cuellar voted to reverse in the only civil case he’s participated in where the insurer lost at the Court of Appeal. (As I noted yesterday, the numbers in the second and third tables don’t add up to the first table numbers because of two certified question appeals from the Ninth Circuit.)

Join us back here next Thursday as we wrap up our review of the Justices’ voting records in insurer cases.

Image courtesy of Pixabay by Joe Breuer (no changes).

How Did Justice Liu Vote in Civil Cases With Insurer Parties?

Today we continue our seven-part post reviewing the voting records of the individual Justices in civil cases involving insurers as named parties.

Since joining the Court in 2011, Justice Liu has participated in eight such cases. He has evenly split his votes – four votes against the insurer’s position, four votes for.

Four of these eight cases were won by the insurer below. Justice Liu voted to affirm in two of those four cases and voted to reverse in the others.

Two of the cases were lost by the insurer at the Court of Appeal, and Justice Liu voted to reverse the insurer’s loss once and to affirm once.

If you’re wondering why the numbers for cases won by the insurer below and for cases lost by insurers below don’t add up to our first data points – total votes for and against insurers – the two additional cases were certified questions from the Ninth Circuit, meaning that neither party lost “below.”

Join us back here tomorrow as we turn our attention to Justice Cuellar’s votes.

Image courtesy of Pixabay by tpsdave (no changes).

How Did Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye Vote in Civil Cases With Insurer Parties?

This is part three of our seven-part post reviewing the Justices’ voting records in cases involving insurer parties. Today: the Chief Justice.

The Court has decided significantly fewer insurer cases from 2011 to 2019 than it did in the previous ten years. Since joining the Court, Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye has voted for insurer parties in four cases while voting against insurers five times.

In Table 1245, we divide the Chief Justice’s cases by the winner below. Since 2011, Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye has voted to affirm in two cases won by the insurer below while voting to reverse three times.

Since 2011, Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye has only participated in two cases where the insurer lost below. She has voted to reverse the insurer’s loss once and voted to affirm once.

Join us back here next Thursday as we examine two more Justices’ voting records.

Image courtesy of Pixabay by 12019 (no changes).

How Did Justice Corrigan Vote in Civil Cases With Insurer Parties?

Last week, we began a seven-part series reviewing each Justice’s voting record, one area of law at a time – beginning with civil cases involving an insurer party. Since 2006, Justice Corrigan has voted for insurer parties 11 times while voting against insurer parties ten times. From 2006 to 2010, she voted for insurers seven times while voting against them five times. From 2011 to 2019, she voted for insurer parties four times while voting against them in five cases.

Between 2006 and 2010, Justice Corrigan votes to affirm twice in cases won by the insurer below while voting to reverse twice. From 2011 to 2019, she has voted to affirm insurer wins twice while voting reverse three times.

From 2006 to 2010, Justice Corrigan voted to reverse insurer losses from the Court of Appeal three times while voting to affirm insurer losses twice. From 2011 to last year, Justice Corrigan split her votes in two cases lost by insurers below, voting to reverse once and affirm once.

Join us back here tomorrow as we address Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye’s voting record in insurer cases.

Image courtesy of Pixabay by 12019 (no changes).

How Has Justice Chin Voted in Insurance Law Cases?

Today, we begin a seven-post series, reviewing the voting records of all seven current Justices in insurance law cases. First up is the Court’s senior Justice (by longevity), Justice Ming Chin, who announced his retirement last week.

Since joining the Court in 1997, Justice Chin has supported insurers’ positions in 31 cases involving insurance law, while voting against insurers in 25 cases. He voted for insurers in eight of ten cases from 1997 to 1999. From 2000 to 2005, he voted for insurer parties 11 times while voting against them in 13 cases. From 2006 to 2009, he voted for insurers in 7 of 10 cases, but since that time, he has voted for insurers’ positions in only 5 of 12 cases.

Since joining the Court, Justice Chin has voted for insurer parties in cases they won below thirteen times, while voting to reverse such decisions eleven times. From 1997 to 2005, he voted for insurers in nine of fifteen cases, but since that time, he has voted for insurers in only four of nine cases.

Overall, Justice Chin has voted for reversal in 14 cases lost by insurers below, while voting for affirmance 11 times. From 1997 to 2003, he voted for reversal in 8 of 12 cases. From 2004 to 2010, he voted for reversal in 5 of 11 cases. Since that time, the Court has decided only two insurer losses, and Justice Chin has split his votes 1-1.

Join us back here next Thursday as we continue to review the individual Justices’ voting records.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Leandro Neumann Ciuffo (no changes).

 

How Have Insurers Fared at the Supreme Court Since 2010?

Today, we conclude our review of the Supreme Court’s overall record in civil insurance law cases since 1990. Between 2010 and 2019, insurer parties won five cases while losing seven. Insurers won only one of five cases from 2010 to 2012 and have broken even with three wins and three losses since 2015.

Among cases won at the Court of Appeal by insurers, insurers won two and lost three since 2010. Insurers were 0-1 in 2011, 2015 and 2017 and 1-0 in 2014 and 2018.

Insurers split four cases down the middle among their losses from the Court of Appeal: 1-1 in 2010, 0-1 in 2012 and 1-0 in 2015.

Join us back here tomorrow as we turn our attention to the individual Justices’ voting records in insurance law cases.

Image courtesy of Flickr by HarshLight (no changes).

LexBlog