This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Goldman, J. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Goldman, J. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Resolution of Appellate Litigation

A Controlled Experiment

Northwestern University

Appellate courts—both state and federal—have experienced dramatic increases in court business since 1960. A popular policy for meeting this demand has been to encourage litigants to end their disputes short of decision by the judges. This article reports the results of the first controlled experiment in the federal appellate court system to test the efficacy of two innovative court procedures designed to meet the litigation explosion swamping the federal courts of appeals: court-supervised confer ences with appellate advocates and court-issued orders to control the speed of the appellate process in individual cases. Both procedures are radical departures from traditional practice. The results from the experiment indicate that the procedures did not significantly reduce appeals, produced negligible improvement in case quality, and had mixed effects in expediting the appellate process. The evidence from the experiment weakens the theory that gave birth to the policy. Nevertheless, further controlled experimentation under different conditions is essential in order to deter mine whether and to what extent the policy can be effective.

Evaluation Review, Vol. 3, No. 4, 557-582 (1979)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X7900300404


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?