Case Study – Hamilton County Judges Essay
Case Study – Hamilton County Judges
Hamilton County judges try thousands of cases per year. In an overwhelming majority of the cases disposed, the verdict stands as rendered. However, some cases are appealed, and of those appealed, some of the cases are reversed. Over a three year period, 182,908 cases were handled by 38 judges in the Common Pleas Court, Domestic Relations Court, and Municipal Court. Two of the judges, Dinkelacker and Hogan, did not serve in the same court for the entire three year period.
The purpose of this report is so that we can evaluate the performance of the judges. Appeals are often the result of mistakes made by judges, and we want to know which judges were doing a good job and which were making too many mistakes. In this report, I am going to describe the basic statistics for each of the three courts. I will also find and show the probability of cases being appealed and reversed in the three different courts, for each judge, and finally I will show the probability of a reversal given that an appeal has been made for each judge.
Below you’ll find the descriptive statistics for each of the individual courts including the minimum, maximum, range, mean, median, and standard deviation of each of the three courts in question. The table above shows the descriptive statistics for the Common Pleas Court. As you can see, this table includes a lot of information. The total number of cases disposed throughout the entire court was 43,945 from 16 of the 38 judges. 1,762 of these cases were appealed, and then 199 of them were reversed. The maximum number of cases disposed by a single judge was 3,372
while the minimum was 955. The maximum number of appealed cases by a single judge was 145, while the minimum was 44. Then, the maximum number of reversed cases by a single judge was 22, with the minimum being 6 cases reversed. The table above shows the descriptive statistics for the Domestic Relations Court. There are only 4 judges in this specific court. From those judges, a total of 30,499 cases were disposed over the three year period. 106 of those cases were appealed, and 17 were reversed total.
The maximum number of cases handled by a single judge was 12,970 cases. The maximum number of cases appealed by a single judge was 48, and the maximum number of cases reversed by a single judge was 9. The minimum number of cases that a judge handled was 2,729, while appealed was 7, and reversed was only 1. Finally, the above table shows the descriptive statistics for the judges in the Municipal Court. Over the three year period 18 judges handled 94,503 cases together in total. 423 of those cases were appealed, and 94 of those appealed were reversed.
The maximum number of cases that a single judge handled 8,277 cases alone, with the minimum being 2,239. The maximum number of appealed cases by a single judge was 43 cases, while the minimum was 4 cases. The maximum number of reversed cases by a single judge was 13 cases. The average number of appealed cases in the Municipal Court was about 24 cases, and the average number of cases that were reversed was 6 cases. Next, I will find and discuss the probability of appeals and the probability of reversals in each of the three courts over the three year period.
I found the probability of appeal by dividing the number of appealed cases in each court by the total number of cases disposed in that court. Then, by multiplying that number by 100, I know the percentage of cases appealed in that court. To find the probability of reversal, I divided the number of cases that were reversed in each court by the total number of cases appealed (since a case has to be appealed before it can be reversed). Then by multiplying that number by 100, I know the percentage of cases that were reversed in that court.
The above table shows the probability of cases being appealed and reversed in the Common Pleas Courts. Out of 43,945 cases, 1,762 of them were appealed. By taking the total number of appealed cases and dividing that by the total number of cases disposed in the court, then I get the probability of appeal. In this case, the probability of appeal is 0. 04009. I multiplied that number by 100 to get the percentage. So, during this three year period, about 4% of cases were appealed. Out of 1,762 cases, 199 of them were reversed.
By taking the total number of reversed cases and dividing that number by the total number of appealed cases, then I get the probability of reversal. In this court, the probability of reversal is 0. 11293. I multiplied that number by 100 to get the percentage. So, about 11. 29% of appealed cases are reversed. DomesticThe above table shows the probability of cases being appealed and reversed in the Domestic Relations Court. Out of 30,499 cases, 106 of them were appealed. By taking the total number of appealed cases and dividing that by the total number of cases disposed in the court, then I get the probability of appeals.
In this case, the probability of appeal is 0. 003475. I multiplied that number by 100 to get the percentage. So, 0. 3475% of cases in the Domestic Relations Court were appealed. Out of the 106 appealed cases, 17 of them were reversed. By taking the total number of reversed cases and dividing that number by the total number of appealed cases, then I get the probability of reversal. In this court the probability of reversal is 0. 1604. By multiplying that number by 100, I got the percentage. So, 16. 04% of appealed cases where reversed.
A

Subject: Appellate, Court,

University/College: University of Chicago

Type of paper: Thesis/Dissertation Chapter

Date: 22 July 2016

Words:

Pages:
Let us write you a custom essay sample on Case Study – Hamilton County Judges
for only $16.38 $13.9/page