Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=914147
 
 

Citations (3)



 
 

Footnotes (118)



 


 



A Quarter Century of Summary Judgment Practice in Six Federal District Courts


Joe S. Cecil


Federal Judicial Center

Rebecca N. Eyre


U.S. Federal Judicial Center

Dean Miletich


U.S. Federal Judicial Center

David Rindskopf


City University of New York (CUNY) - School of Education

June 2, 2007

1st Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies Paper

Abstract:     
Summary judgment in federal courts has been widely regarded as an initially underused procedural device that was revitalized by the 1986 Supreme Court trilogy of Celotex, Anderson, and Matsushia. Some recent commentators believe summary judgment activity has expanded to the point that it threatens the right to trial. We examined summary judgment practice in six federal district courts during six time periods over twenty-five years (1975 - 2000), extracting information on summary judgment practice from 15,000 docket sheets in random samples of terminated cases. We found that when we controlled for changes over time in the types of cases being filed, the likelihood that a case contained one or more motions for summary judgment increased before the Supreme Court trilogy, from approximately 12% in 1975 to 17% in 1986, and has remained fairly steady at approximately 19% since that time. The increase prior to the 1986 trilogy and the modest changes subsequent to the trilogy would be unexpected by many legal commentators. Although summary judgment motions have increased over this twenty-five year period, this increase reflects, at least in part, increased filings of civil rights cases that have always experienced a high rate of summary judgment motions. Surprisingly, no statistically significant changes over time were found in the outcome of defendants' or plaintiffs' summary judgment motions, again after controlling for differences across courts and types of cases. These findings call into question the interpretation that the trilogy led to expansive increases in summary judgment. Our analysis suggests, instead, that changes in civil rules and federal case management practices prior to the trilogy may have been more important in bringing about changes in summary judgment practice.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 41

Keywords: summary judgment, civil procedure, vanishing trial

working papers series





Download This Paper

Date posted: July 6, 2006  

Suggested Citation

Cecil, Joe S. and Eyre, Rebecca N. and Miletich, Dean and Rindskopf, David, A Quarter Century of Summary Judgment Practice in Six Federal District Courts (June 2, 2007). 1st Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies Paper. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=914147 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.914147

Contact Information

Joe S. Cecil (Contact Author)
Federal Judicial Center ( email )
Washington, DC 20002
United States
Rebecca N. Eyre
U.S. Federal Judicial Center ( email )
Washington, DC 20002
United States
Dean Miletich
U.S. Federal Judicial Center ( email )
Washington, DC 20002
United States
David Rindskopf
City University of New York (CUNY) - School of Education ( email )
New York, NY
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,679
Downloads: 330
Download Rank: 51,843
Citations:  3
Footnotes:  118

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.359 seconds