Photo of Kirk Jenkins

Kirk Jenkins brings a wealth of experience to his appellate practice, which focuses on antitrust and constitutional law, as well as products liability, RICO, price fixing, information sharing among competitors and class certification. In addition to handling appeals, he also regularly works with trial teams to ensure that important issues are properly presented and preserved for appellate review.  Mr. Jenkins is a pioneer in the application of data analytics to appellate decision-making and writes two analytics blogs, the California Supreme Court Review and the Illinois Supreme Court Review, as well as regularly writing for various legal publications.

Today, we’re reviewing the contents of our database, which includes every case decided by the California Supreme Court since January 8, 1990.  For every case, we’ve captured the following data points:

CIVIL CASES:

Official Reporter Citation

California Reporter Citation

Docket Number

Case Name

Petitioner

Petitioner Governmental Entity (Y/N)

Respondent Governmental Entity (Y/N)

Source of Appellate

Last time, we began our analysis by addressing the competing theories of judicial behavior.  Formalism, the oldest theory, teaches that judicial decision making can be explained and predicted based upon the facts, the applicable law and precedent and judicial deliberations – and nothing more.  But if formalism explains all of judicial decision making, then many

Our latest repost:

We begin our analysis by addressing the foundation of the entire body of data analytic scholarship on appellate judging: competing theories of judicial decision making.

The oldest theory by far is generally known in the literature as “formalism.”  This is the theory we all learned in law school, according to which every

Our short series of contextual reposts continues:

Although the state Supreme Courts have not attracted anything near the level of study from academics engaged in empirical legal studies that the U.S. Supreme Courts and Federal Circuits have a number of different researchers have attempted to compare how influential the various state courts are for the

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, this blog 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 those days: “Interesting,

Last time, we reviewed Justice Corrigan’s voting record to see how often she has been in the minority in civil cases, year by year since joining the Court.  Overall, Justice Corrigan has been in the minority in 5.98% of the civil cases she’s participated in.  Today, we’re looking at Justice Liu’s numbers.

Justice Liu has

Today we’re concluding our initial review of the Justices’ voting records by reviewing Justice Cuellar and Justice Groban.

Since joining the Court in 2015, Justice Cuellar has voted in 201 civil cases.  He has voted in affirm in 73 cases and to reverse 90 times.  Those votes show a curious time pattern: in 2015 and