skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 156211 Find in a Library
Title: Effectiveness of Flexible Assignment of Appeals Between Supreme and Intermediate Courts
Journal: Judicature  Volume:78  Issue:6  Dated:(May-June 1995)  Pages:292-298
Author(s): T B Marvell
Date Published: 1995
Page Count: 7
Sponsoring Agency: State Justice Institute
Alexandria, VA 22314
Type: Survey
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: Flexible assignment systems are evaluated.
Abstract: This article reports the results of a study conducted to determine the extent of the advantages and disadvantages of a flexible assignment of appeals system. The research had two phases: detailed descriptive studies of appellate systems with flexible assignment, based mainly on 1992-1993 interviews with supreme court justices, intermediate court judges, staff attorneys, and court clerks; and analysis of court data from all States with intermediate courts to determine whether the flexible assignment States had fewer double appeals and less workload imbalance. A description of the transfer process and the criteria for transfer are presented. Statistical analysis procedures are described. The author concludes that the descriptive material and statistical analyses indicate that neither the purported beneficial nor negative effects of flexible assignment occur, at least in recent years. The results of the statistical analyses indicate that the flexible assignment procedure neither reduces the double appeal rate or the imbalance of delay and workloads between supreme courts and intermediate courts, nor does it greatly affect the number of appeals that judges are able to decide, if one controls court size. Flexible assignment jurisdiction and procedures in the 10 States examined in this study are summarized. Tables, footnotes
Main Term(s): Appellate courts
Index Term(s): Appeal procedures; Court reorganization; Intermediate appellate courts
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.