Yesterday, we reviewed the data on the Justices’ agreement rates with each other in divided civil cases between 2002 and 2007.  Today, we’re looking at the next six year period, from 2008 to 2013.  One change from the last three posts – since five current-day Justices (if you include the recently retired Justice Werdegar) were seated by the end of this period, we present the data this time by gathering every agreement rate for a particular Justice into a single Table.  To make the numbers easier to follow, this will involve a bit of repetition – for example, the agreement rate for Justices Corrigan and Chin is included in both Justices’ tables.

For this period, Justice Corrigan’s highest agreement rates were with Justice Chin (88.89%) and Justice Baxter (80%).  Two things to note about our next two entries, Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye (77.78%) and Justice Liu (73.33%) – each of these new Justices agreed with Justice Corrigan more often than their predecessors, Chief Justice George (66.67%) and Justice Moreno (42.86%).  Justice Corrigan’s agreement rate with Justice Werdegar was 57.78%.  Her agreement rate with the pro tem Justices was 45.45%.  Finally, she agreed with Justice Kennard in 37.78% of divided civil cases.

Justice Kennard’s highest agreement rates were with three Justices in the sixties – Chief Justice George, (65.22%), the pro tems (64.29%) and Justice Werdegar (62.22%).  In contrast to Justice Corrigan, the two new Justices moved the Court further away from Justice Kennard – her rate with Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye was 52.63%, and with Justice Liu, 37.5% (his predecessor Justice Moreno was at 48.15%).  Justices Kennard and Baxter agreed in 50% of divided civil cases.  Justices Kennard and Chin agreed 40.91% of the time, and as mentioned above, Justices Kennard and Corrigan agreed in 37.78% of cases.

Justice Werdegar’s agreement rates were comparatively close for the two newly-nominated Justices.  Justice Werdegar and Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye had a rate of 84.21% to the agreement rate of Justice Werdegar and Chief Justice George – 78.26%.  Justices Werdegar and Moreno had an agreement rate of 70.37%.  She had an agreement rate with Justice Liu of 81.25%.  Justice Werdegar’s agreement rate with the pro tem Justices was 76.92%.  Her rate with Justice Kennard was 62.22%.  Her rate was in the fifties with two Justices – Justice Corrigan (57.78%) and Baxter (52.27%).  Justice Werdegar and Justice Chin had an agreement rate of 45.83%.

Chief Justice George’s agreement rate with the pro tem Justices was 100%.  The Chief’s agreement rate with Justice Werdegar was 78.26%, with Justice Chin was 75%, and with Justice Baxter – 70.83%.  Chief Justice George’s agreement rate with Justices Corrigan and Kennard were 66.67% and 65.22%, respectively.  Chief Justice George had an agreement rate of 54.17% with Justice Moreno.

Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye and Justice Werdegar had an agreement rate of 84.21%.  Her agreement rate was in the seventies with four Justices – Justice Corrigan (77.78%), Justice Baxter (76.47%), Justice Liu (75%) and Justice Chin (70.59%).  Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye had an agreement rate with the pro tem Justices of 62.5%.  Finally, the Chief Justice had an agreement rate with Justice Kennard of 52.63%.

Justice Chin’s agreement rate with Justices Corrigan (88.89%) and Baxter (88.64%) were nearly identical.  Justice Chin’s rates with the two Chief Justices was nearly identical too – Chief Justice George (75%) and Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye (70.59%).  Justice Chin’s agreement rates with Justices Moreno and Liu were quite close too – 50% (Justice Liu) and 42.86% (Justice Moreno).  Justice Chin had an agreement rate of 50%.  Justices Chin and Werdegar had an agreement rate of 45.83%, and Justices Chin and Kennard had a rate of 40.91%.

Justices Baxter and Chin had an agreement rate of 88.64%.  Justices Baxter and Corrigan had a rate of 80%.  Justice Baxter and Chief Justices Cantil-Sakauye and George were both in the seventies – 76.47% and 70.83%, respectively.  Four combinations were in the fifties – Justices Baxter and Liu, 57.14%, Justices Baxter and Werdegar, 52.27%, and Justice Baxter and Justices Kennard and the pro tems (both 50%).  Justice Baxter and Justice Moreno had an agreement rate of 39.29%.

Justices Moreno and Werdegar had an agreement rate of 70.37%.  His agreement rate with the pro tems was 66.67%.  His rate with Chief Justice George was 54.17%.  Justice Moreno had an agreement rate in the forties with three Justices – Justice Kennard (48.15%) and Justices Corrigan and Chin (both 42.86%).  Justices Moreno and Baxter had an agreement rate of 39.29%.

Justices Liu and Werdegar had an agreement rate of 81.25%.  Justice Liu and the pro tems were just behind at 80%.  Justice Liu and Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye had an agreement rate of 75%, and Justices Liu and Corrigan were at 73.33%.  Justice Liu was in the fifties with Justice Baxter (57.14%) and Justice Chin (50%).  Justices Liu and Kennard had an agreement rate of 37.5%.

The pro tem Justices and Chief Justice George had an agreement rate of 100%.  The pro tems and Justice Liu, as noted just above, were at 80%, and the pro tems and Justice Werdegar were at 76.92%.  The pro tems were in the sixties with three Justices – Justice Moreno (66.67%), Justice Kennard (64.29%) and Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye (62.5%).  The pro tem Justices were at 50% with Justice Chin and Justice Baxter.  The pro tems and Justice Corrigan had an agreement rate of 45.45%.

Join us back here next week as we review the data for the years 2014 through 2018.

Image courtesy of Flickr by Mike Baird (no changes).