You are here

Reports and 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.

Displaying 21 - 30 of 298
Will return exact match for word(s) entered
Titlesort descending Date
Alternative Structures for Bankruptcy Appeals

Under the current bankruptcy appellate system, appeals from dispositive orders of bankruptcy judges are taken to the district court or to the bankruptcy appellate panel, if one has been established and the district has chosen to participate, with further appeal as of right to the court of appeals. In response to legislative proposals to change this system, the Judicial Conference of the United States asked Congress to defer action until the judiciary had an opportunity to "study further the existing process and possible alternative structures and to submit a subsequent report to Congress." To facilitate the Conference's deliberations, its Committee on the Administration of the Bankruptcy System asked the Federal Judicial Center to study the existing bankruptcy appellate structure and possible alternatives. This report sets out the results of that study. It describes the bankruptcy appellate system now operating in the United States and how it evolved, sets out the recent efforts to change this system, and analyzes the evidence regarding the need for change and the desirability of proposed changes.

Note: A slightly updated version of this study Alternative Structures for Bankruptcy Appeals (2002) was published at 76 American Bankruptcy Law Journal 625 (Fall 2002).

January 1, 2000
Alternative Structures for Bankruptcy Appeals

Under the current bankruptcy appellate system, appeals from dispositive orders of bankruptcy judges are taken to the district court or to the bankruptcy appellate panel, if one has been established and the district has chosen to participate, with further appeal as of right to the court of appeals. In response to legislative proposals to change this system, the Judicial Conference of the United States asked Congress to defer action until the judiciary had an opportunity to "study further the existing process and possible alternative structures and to submit a subsequent report to Congress." To facilitate the Conference's deliberations, its Committee on the Administration of the Bankruptcy System asked the Federal Judicial Center to study the existing bankruptcy appellate structure and possible alternatives. This report sets out the results of that study. It describes the bankruptcy appellate system now operating in the United States and how it evolved, sets out the recent efforts to change this system, and analyzes the evidence regarding the need for change and the desirability of proposed changes.

Reprinted from 76 American Bankruptcy Law Journal 625 (Fall 2002).

Note: This is a slightly updated version of the Center's publication Alternative Structures for Bankruptcy Appeals (2000, 123 pp.). This report is identical to the Federal Judicial Center's report that was considered by the Judicial Conference Bankruptcy Committee in making its recommendations in 1999, except that Part 2 has been updated to reflect more recent legislative and Judicial Conference activity. In addition, Appendices A, B, and D to the initial report are omitted and minor editorial changes have been made.

 

January 1, 2002
Alternatives to Litigation: Do They Have a Place in the Federal District Courts?

Long Range Planning Series, Paper No. 4

A discussion paper that analyzes arguments for and against incorporating ADR programs into the case-management procedures of federal district courts. The authors debate issues such as whether ADR is compatible with the role of the federal courts, whether ADR conserves litigants' costs and court resources, whether private or public-sector development of ADR is preferable, and whether mandatory or voluntary programs should be pursued.

January 1, 1995
An Analysis of Disposition Times for Capital Habeas Corpus Petitions

Report to the Conference of Chief Circuit Judges and Circuit Executives regarding the disposition times of capital habeas petitions in both federal district and appellate courts.

September 1, 1995
An Empirical Examination of Attorneys' Choice of Forum in Class Action Litigation

This article presents attorney responses to a national random survey of 728 attorneys who represented plaintiffs and defendants in 621 recently closed class action cases. Those cases had been filed in or removed to federal courts, and the article focuses on attorneys' reasons for choosing a state or federal forum. The article also tracks the differences in rulings in state and federal courts on class certification, motions to dismiss, settlement review, and attorney fee awards in a subset of the 621 cases.

Note that this article draws on the same data examined in Attorney Reports on the Impact of Amchem and Ortiz on Choice of a Federal or State Forum in Class Action Litigation (2004).

A post-Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) article on the same data Attorney Choice of Forum in Class Action Litigation: What Difference Does it Make? (2006) is also available.

December 17, 2005
An Empirical Study of Rule 11 Sanctions

The results of a survey of 292 federal district judges concerning how they interpret and apply the 1983 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 (before the 1993 amendments). Based on the judges' hypothetical reactions to actual cases in which Rule 11 sanctions were requested, the study outlines the judges' standards and rationales for imposing sanctions, the kinds of sanctions imposed, and the relationship between the judges' opinions and their expectations of how their colleagues would rule on the same issues.

January 1, 1985
An Evaluation of Computer Assisted Legal Research Systems for Federal Court Applications

This report describes a Federal Judicial Center study that evaluated the use of computer-assisted legal research systems in federal courts in the 1970s.The report explained the systems that were compared and the methodology of the project, provides comparative data, and recommended adoption of the "full-text" system for use in federal courts.

January 1, 1977
An Evaluation of Limited Publication in the United States Courts of Appeals: The Price of Reform

A 1981 examination of plans for limited publication of opinions in the federal courts of appeals. The report reviews the background of publication plans, analyzes the relation between the language of the plans and the publication rates of the circuit courts, empirically assesses the costs and benefits of limited publication, and offers a model rule for publication.

Reprinted from 48 University of Chicago Law Review 573 (1981).

January 1, 1981
An Evaluation of the Civil Appeals Management Plan: An Experiment in Judicial Administration

An evaluation of the first experimental operation of the Civil Appeals Management Plan (CAMP) of the Second Circuit. The report evaluated a set of procedures designed to eliminate burdensome appeals, improve the quality of appeals, and expedite the appellate process through the use of mandatory scheduling orders and pre-argument conferences supervised by staff counsel. The report concluded that the initial experiment failed to provide conclusive evidence of the plan's substantive value but that further analysis is warranted (but see A Reevaluation of the Civil Appeals Management Plan).

January 1, 1977
An Evaluative Review of Programs and Design of Future Evaluation Framework

This report to the Federal Judicial Center by staff of the University of Chicago Law School (Norval Morris) and University Extension (C. Ranlet Lincoln) provided a general evaluation of the Center's continuing education and training programs through 1976, and suggested an evaluation framework for long-range planning and the design of individual programs.

January 1, 1976

Pages