You are here
Reports & Studies
Below is a list of a number of past published studies conducted by the Research Division. Some Center reports are not published or made publicly available due to restrictions in place from the source of the research request. Most research reports can be downloaded and in some instances, a hardcopy publication can be requested. See also Manuals, Monographs, & Guides.
Displaying 281 - 290 of 345|
Title |
Date |
|---|---|
|
Citations to Unpublished Opinions in the Federal Courts of Appeals: Preliminary Report The Appellate Rules Advisory Committee has proposed a new Rule 32.1, which would permit attorneys and courts in federal appeals in all circuits to cite unpublished opinions. At its June 2004 meeting, the Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure asked the Appellate Rules Advisory Committee to ask the Federal Judicial Center to conduct empirical research that would yield results helpful to the Standing Committee's consideration of the proposed rule. The Center's research effort consists of three components: (1) a survey of judges, (2) a survey of attorneys, and (3) a survey of case files. This preliminary report, which includes analyses of all responses in the survey of judges, almost all of the responses in the survey of attorneys, and a majority of cases in the survey of case files (9 out of 13 circuits), was presented to the Appellate Rules Advisory Committee on April 18, 2005. The authors expect to have all data analyzed and a complete report for the Standing Committee on Rules meeting on June 15-16, 2005. |
April 14, 2005 |
|
Circuit CJA Case-Budgeting Attorney Pilot Project Evaluation (2007–2009) Final Report During the period January through April of 2007, a case-budgeting attorney (CBA) was hired in each of the Second, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits as part of the Case-Budgeting Attorney Pilot Project authorized by the Judicial Conference of the United States. The primary responsibilities of the CBAs were providing objective case-budgeting advice to attorneys and judges and enhancing case management in the pilot circuits. The Judicial Conference’s Committee on Defender Services asked the Federal Judicial Center to conduct an evaluation of the pilot program. This final report was submitted on December 20, 2010.
|
January 1, 2010 |
|
Circuit CJA Case-Budgeting Attorney Pilot Project Evaluation (2007–2009) Appendix During the period January through April of 2007, a case-budgeting attorney (CBA) was hired in each of the Second, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits as part of the Case-Budgeting Attorney Pilot Project authorized by the Judicial Conference of the United States. The primary responsibilities of the CBAs were providing objective case-budgeting advice to attorneys and judges and enhancing case management in the pilot circuits. The Judicial Conference’s Committee on Defender Services asked the Federal Judicial Center to conduct an evaluation of the pilot program. This appendix supplements the final report that was submitted on December 20, 2010. |
December 20, 2010 |
|
Chapter 11 Venue Choice by Large Public Companies: A Report to the Judicial Conference Committee on the Administration of the Bankruptcy System A report that responds to a request by the Judicial Conference Committee on the Administration of the Bankruptcy System for empirical information and analysis on whether the bankruptcy case venue statutes and procedural rule should be amended. The report presents the results of a 1996 survey of federal bankruptcy judges about Chapter 11 venue and judges' views of a proposal to amend 28 U.S.C. Section 1408 to prohibit corporate debtors from filing for relief in a district based solely on the debtor's state of incorporation or based solely on an earlier filing by a subsidiary in the district. The report also presents analyses of administrative and demographic characteristics of large public companies that emerged from Chapter 11 during 1994 and 1995. |
January 1, 1997 |
|
Certified Questions of State Law: An Examination of State and Territorial Authorizing Statutes This report examines state and territorial statutes that authorize certification of questions of state law. Forty-nine states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, and the Mariana Islands all have certified question statutes, which specify from which courts they can accept questions. The report identifies the general trends and considerable variations between the statutes. |
June 3, 2020 |
|
Certification of Questions of State Law in the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Third, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits (2010–2018) This report evaluates the use of certified questions of state law between 2010 and 2018 in three U.S. circuit courts of appeal: the Ninth, Sixth, and Third Circuits. The data shows variation in the rate of certification and timing of certification events between the circuits. |
June 3, 2020 |
|
Central Legal Staffs in the United States Courts of Appeals: A Survey of Internal Operating Procedures A discussion of the use of staff attorneys in each circuit court, based on reports prepared by senior staff attorneys. |
January 1, 1978 |
|
Case Studies of Mass Tort Limited Fund Class Action Settlements & Bankruptcy Reorganizations This is an expanded version of a report that was previously published as Appendix E of the Report of the Advisory Group on Civil Rules and the Working Group on Mass Torts (Report on Mass Tort Litigation) February 15, 1999. In this version, the author expands her analysis by examining publicly available information about three additional bankruptcy cases. By broadening the range of the study, she was better able to make direct comparisons of--to evaluate the policy implications of--the processes used in class actions and bankruptcies. This report also offers informed suggestions for improving approaches to resolving tort claims against businesses that are approaching insolvency. |
January 1, 2000 |
|
Case Management and Court Management in United States District Courts An oft-cited analysis of the differences between court management procedures resulting in fast versus slow processing and those resulting in high versus low rates of disposition. This volume reports the overall results of the District Court Studies Project, a long-range effort by the Federal Judicial Center to assist the work of the United States district courts. The goal of the project is to help the courts achieve and reconcile the purpose stated in Rule 1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: "to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action." Specifically, the project has been designed to determine what procedures are associated with the highest possible speed and productivity, consistent with he highest standards of justice. Alternative procedures are examined and recommended. |
January 1, 1977 |
|
Case Law Divergence from the Federal Rules of Evidence This report is an effort to increase the awareness of counsel practicing in federal courts, as well as judges, about the possibility that case law has diverged from the text of some of the Federal Rules of Evidence. At the request of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on the Rules of Evidence, Professor Daniel Capra, committee reporter, highlights the major instances in which case law has diverged from an applicable Rule. This divergence comes in two forms: (1) where the case law (defined as case law in at least one circuit) is flatly inconsistent with the text of the Rule, the Committee Note explaining the text, or both; and (2) where the case law has provided significant development on a point that is not addressed by either the text of the Rule or the Committee Note. This report is reprinted at 197 Federal Rules Decisions 531 (2001). |
October 3, 2000 |
