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
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
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,
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.
Yesterday, we announced that we’ve expanded the data library which powers the California Supreme Court Review – by a lot. We’ve added many new data points for all the cases which were already in the database, as well as moving the start point of the library back to November 1, 1994 – just before Associate
Fifty weeks (and just over a hundred posts) ago, we started the California Supreme Court Review, applying statistical and data analytic techniques to studying the decision making of the California Supreme Court. Our analysis was based upon a data library which we created based on dozens of data points drawn from every one of the
Last week, we began addressing the issue of the average lag time from grant of review to oral argument and from argument to decision, analyzing the data for the civil and criminal dockets from 2000 to 2007. This week, we’ll address the data for 2008 through 2016, beginning today with the civil docket.
There is
Yesterday, we analyzed the average lag time from grant of review to oral argument, and oral argument to decision, in civil cases between 2000 and 2007. Today, we turn our attention to the Court’s criminal docket for the same years.
For the entire period, the average lag time from grant of review to oral argument
This week, we begin a new phase of our analysis: how long does the average case remain pending at the California Supreme Court from grant of review to oral argument to decision, and what are the differences between civil, criminal and death penalty cases?
In Table 167 below, we report the mean number of days,
Yesterday, we began our analysis of a new question: how much of the California Supreme Court’s civil and criminal dockets arises from unpublished Court of Appeal decisions? Today, we turn our attention to the Court’s criminal docket (omitting the automatic death penalty appeals).
Unpublished decisions are significantly more common on the criminal docket than they