Use of Adjuncts to Supplement Judicial Resources in Six Jurisdictions, 1983-1986: [United States] (ICPSR 8979)
Version Date: Jan 12, 2006 View help for published
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s)
Alexander Aikman;
Mary Elsner Oram;
Frederick Miller
https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR08979.v1
Version V1
Summary View help for Summary
This multi-site data collection evaluates the impact of judicial adjunct attorneys and referees on the court system at the county and state levels in six jurisdictions: (1) Pima County, Arizona, (2) Multnomah County, Oregon, (3) King County, Washington, (4) Hennepin County, Minnesota, (5) Phoenix, Arizona, and (6) the state of Connecticut. There are three different units of observation in this study: (1) civil trial cases, (2) trial judges, including regular judges and adjunct attorneys, and (3) litigating attorneys. The court case data include information on type of case, date of trial, type of judge, type of disposition, and date of disposition. For the questionnaire data obtained on judges, adjuncts, and litigating attorneys, information includes experience with the program, satisfaction, and ideas for changes.
Citation View help for Citation
Export Citation:
Funding View help for Funding
Subject Terms View help for Subject Terms
Geographic Coverage View help for Geographic Coverage
HideTime Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)
Date of Collection View help for Date of Collection
Sample View help for Sample
Sampling procedures varied by site. In Tucson all the civil court trial cases disposed by judicial adjuncts or regular judges between January 1984 and March 1985 were selected. The first 50 civil cases disposed each quarter that requested jury trials also were included in the sample. In Portland 10 percent of the cases with motions for summary judgments heard by judicial adjuncts and regular judges between January 1983 and December 1985 were selected for the sample. In Minneapolis the sample consisted of all the civil cases referred to arbitration hearings conducted by adjunct attorneys from September 1985 to June 1986. In Seattle the sample included regular judges, adjunct attorneys, and litigating attorneys who responded to a mailed questionnaire. In Phoenix the sample included civil appeals that were disposed by adjunct attorneys and judges between 1983 and 1985. In Connecticut a sample was selected from all the civil cases referred to the trial reference program in three Superior Courts from January 1984 through June 1985. For Connecticut there is also a sample of regular judges, trial adjunct attorneys, litigating attorneys, and clients who responded to a mailed questionnaire.
Data Source View help for Data Source
court records and mailed questionnaires
Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)
HideOriginal Release Date View help for Original Release Date
1989-01-10
Version History View help for Version History
- Aikman, Alexander, Mary Elsner Oram, and Frederick Miller. USE OF ADJUNCTS TO SUPPLEMENT JUDICIAL RESOURCES IN SIX JURISDICTIONS, 1983-1986: [UNITED STATES]. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts [producer], 1984. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 1988. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR08979.v1
2006-01-12 All files were removed from dataset 11 and flagged as study-level files, so that they will accompany all downloads.
2005-11-04 On 2005-03-14 new files were added to one or more datasets. These files included additional setup files as well as one or more of the following: SAS program, SAS transport, SPSS portable, and Stata system files. The metadata record was revised 2005-11-04 to reflect these additions.
Notes
The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.