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 appellate decisions are actually made. Here’s the second in our reprint series, both here and at the California blog:
The…
The Illinois Supreme Court Review recently marked its sixth anniversary. In April, the California Supreme Court Review 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, but what difference does it make?”
So for the next 2-3 weeks, we’ll be reprinting those context…
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 appellate decisions are actually made. Here’s the second in our reprint series, both here and at the California blog:
The…
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, but what difference does it make?”
So for the next 2-3 weeks, we’ll be reprinting those context posts – with…
We know we’re not allowed to cite to unpublished Court of Appeal decisions. But what about citing to such cases simply to show ranges of damages in other similar cases (i.e., for factual comparison, not law)? Here’s an unpub’d decision that seems to show that’s ok:
Defendants point to several cases where the noneconomic damages award was substantially less than the $4 million award in this case; plaintiff cites cases where the award was substantially…
In our prior post, we noted that the Sixth Circuit seldom grants motions to certify questions of state law. And even though the circuit grants less than 20% of such motions, the questions still have to be accepted by the state supreme court. But the certification process is often a rough road.
No recent case better exemplifies those difficulties than Lindenberg v. Jackson Nat’l Life Ins. Co., 912 F.3d 348 (6th Cir. 2018), which…
The Iowa Supreme Court is expected to release opinions in two cases Friday, February 26, 2021. Below are On Brief’s previously published summaries of the cases. Go to On Brief’s Cases in the Pipeline page to read briefs filed with the Court in the appeals.
Clark v. State (previous On Brief summary here)
Submitted to the Court Dec. 16, 2020, without oral argument.
Question: Does a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel apply…
A law-enforcement officer’s “common sense” observation that a person might be illegally using a cell phone while driving is reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle for further investigation, the Iowa Supreme Court said in a decision handed down Feb. 19.
The Court’s divided 4-3 decision in State v. Struve affirmed the Clinton County District Court’s denial of Steven Struve’s motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop initiated on the basis of two officers’…
Today’s DJ profile is Inside Insight: Appellate Justice Carin Fujisaki worked at the State Supreme Court for nearly 30 years.
Fujisaki grew up in Los Angeles. Her mother worked at the RAND Corp. and her father, Hiroshi Fujisaki, was a deputy public defender and later Los Angeles County Superior Court judge best known for presiding over the wrongful death lawsuit against O.J. Simpson.
Fujisaki’s parents and grandparents had been swept up in one of the…
The DJ reports on yesterday’s Congressional hearing (before the House Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet) about the federal courts in Federal judges from 2 California districts ask for more judgeships. The hearing was titled “The Need for New Lower Court Judgeships, 30 Years in the Making.”
Congress decades ago abandoned its long-standing policy of regularly expanding the federal courts to match population growth. The results have been especially noticeable in fast-growing western…