Precedent Usage and Reliance: From Briefs to the Final Opinion

Abstract

This paper examines several state high courts across a range of private torts cases over six years. The research question of interest is the influence that appellant/appellee briefs have on precedents that state high courts use in their opinions. I utilize a theory of motivated reasoning as a way to integrate several factors that may influence how courts utilize precedents. In particular, I examine several possible sources of motivated reasoning: ideological influences, legal influences, and hierarchical influences. My dependent variables are whether the court cites a precedent that is listed in a brief and how they treat the precedent substantively. I test my research hypotheses using several statistical methodologies: multinomial logit, and logit models with controls for the individual case. I find moderate to strong support for all of my research hypotheses, including the influence of ideological factors, legal factors, and hierarchical factors.