skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

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: 66180 Find in a Library
Title: JUDICIAL DECISIONS AND ORGANIZATION CHANGE - SOME THEORETICAL AND EMPIRICAL NOTES ON STATE COURT DECISIONS AND STATE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
Journal: LAW AND SOCIETY REVIEW  Volume:14  Issue:1  Dated:(FALL 1979)  Pages:27-56
Author(s): C A JOHNSON
Corporate Author: Law and Society Assoc
University of Denver
College of Law
United States of America
Date Published: 1979
Page Count: 30
Sponsoring Agency: Law and Society Assoc
Denver, CO 80204
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: STUDY OF FIVE PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT DECISIONS AGAINST STATE AGENCIES FOUND THAT THOSE AGENCIES TRIED TO IGNORE AND AVOID RULINGS ADVERSE TO THEIR INTERESTS.
Abstract: WHEN A COURT HANDS DOWN A RULING CONCERNING A STATE AGENCY, THE ORGANIZATION FIRST READS THE JUDICIAL ORDER AS SUBJECTIVELY AS POSSIBLE, DECIDING ITS IMPACT ON THE AGENCY. IF THE DECISION IS ADVERSE TO THEM, THE AGENCY MAY INITIATE A SEARCH FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THE RULING AND ALTERNATIVE RESPONSES TO IT. THE EXTENT OF THE SEARCH IS DETERMINED BY THE PROBABILITY OF THE RULINGS ENFORCEMENT. AGENCIES MUST DECIDE WHETHER TO INITIATE POLICY AND DECISIONMAKING CHANGES IF SO ORDERED BY THE COURT. IF AN ORGANIZATION CAN EVADE THE DECISION, USING ITS FINANCIAL RESOURCES, IT WILL. FOR THIS STUDY, A STATE WAS SELECTED WHERE THE STATE SUPREME COURT RULINGS' IMPACT COULD BE IDENTIFIED. PUBLIC RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS WERE REVIEWED TO DETERMINE IF ANY POLICY HAD CHANGED BECAUSE OF THE RULINGS, AND AGENCY OFFICIALS WERE INTERVIEWED TO IDENTIFY ANY CHANGE OR REVISION IN DECISIONMAKING BEHAVIOR. THE AGENCIES STUDIED WERE THE WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION BOARD, BUREAU OF CORRECTION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION, AND BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE. THREE OF THE AGENCIES FOUND THE JUDICIAL DECISION WOULD HAVE AN ADVERSE AFFECT ON THEIR ORGANIZATION AND EXPLORED WAYS TO NOT COMPLY. BESIDES SUPPORTING THE AVOIDANCE THEORY, THE STUDY FOUND THAT MORE DETAILED EMPIRICAL WORK CAN BE DONE WITH RESPECT TO THE INTERPRETATION AND SEARCH PHASE OF THE AGENCY RESPONSE. FINALLY, ONE OR MORE STUDIES COULD PROFITABLY EXPLORE THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF THE STAGES AT WHICH AGENCIES DECIDE TO COMPLY WITH OR EVADE COURT DECISIONS, AND RELATE THESE FINDINGS TO THE APPARENT REASONS FOR AGENCY RESPONSE. CHARTS, CASE SUMMARIES AND A BIBLIOGRAPHY ARE INCLUDED.
Index Term(s): Court ordered institutional reform; Judicial decision compliance; Organization studies; State government; State supreme courts
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=66180

*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.