Designated Diffidence: District Court Judges on the Courts of Appeals

• NCJ Number: 195485
• Journal: Law & Society Review Volume: 35 Issue: 3 Dated: 2001 Pages: 565-606
• Author(s): James J. Brudney; Corey Ditslear
• Date Published: 2001
• Length: 42 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This article studies the behavior and voting patterns of district judges when helping to decide labor law cases of the United States Courts of Appeals.

Abstract

The authors note that due to the large volume of cases heard by the United States Courts of Appeal, district court judges often are invited to help decide cases. Although scholars and judges have frequently voiced concerns over how these visiting judges affect the consistency, legitimacy, and collegiality of the Court, little empirical research has been conducted in this area. Thus, the present study sought to add a kernel of knowledge to this understudied topic. The first section of the article explains that a judge’s individual values and experiences are integrally involved in the decision-making process at the appellate level. This section also discusses the justifications for utilizing district judges on court of appeals panels and the concerns raised by this practice. Section two describes the methodology used by the authors. The participation of district judges in more than 1,100 published and unpublished court of appeals cases was examined for the time period between October 1986 and November 1993. All of the cases under consideration involved unfair labor practice claims under the National Labor Relations Act. The study included the voting patterns of 223 appellate judges and 105 district judges, as well as the nature of their participation (authoring majority opinions, joining the majority, authoring dissent). Biographical factors such as personal attributes, education, and political and professional experience were also accounted for. Part three presents the findings of the logistic regression analysis showing that visiting district judges differed in many respects from their appellate counterparts. District judges were more likely to be older and less likely to have attended an elite law school. Furthermore, district judges rarely authored opinions, preferring to remain in the background of appellate decisions. The final section of the article discusses the implications of these findings, as well as the limitations of the current research. Tables, references