Showing 1 – 16 of 16 results.
Curated
Access to Justice in Ontario, 1985-1988 (ICPSR 9729)
Released/updated on: 1999-11-19
Geographic coverage: Canada, Ontario, Global
Time period: 1985-01-01--1988-12-31
This data collection, which was designed to assess experiences with the Ontario, Canada, civil justice system, is a replication and extension of a survey conducted by the Civil Litigation Research Project at the University of Wisconsin. Interviews were conducted with the heads of households. Questions were asked about the nature of the problem, e.g., auto accident, work injury, discrimination, problems with landlord, violations of privacy, or victimization. Questions were also asked about actions taken in response to the problem, such as whether a lawyer was contacted, reasons for not contacting a lawyer, whether non-lawyer assistance was sought, whether a claim was made, and reasons for not making a claim. Finally, questions were asked about the household's experience with the Ontario justice system if a claim was made, including whether there was a trial or a hearing, how much the lawyer charged, evaluation of the result, satisfaction with the result, evaluation of the cost, perceived delay, agreement reached, and compensation awarded. Major demographic variables include age, occupation, number of persons in household, language, ethnic background, religion, education, and family income.
Curated
Restricted
Civil Justice Survey of State Courts, 1992 (ICPSR 6587)
Released/updated on: 2011-11-02
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1991-07-01--1992-06-30
This survey is the first broad-based, systematic examination of the nature of civil litigation in state general jurisdiction trial courts. Data collection was carried out by the National Center for State Courts with assistance from the National Association of Criminal Justice Planners and the United States Bureau of the Census. The data collection produced two datasets. Part 1, Tort, Contract, and Real Property Rights Data, is a merged sample of approximately 30,000 tort, contract, and real property rights cases disposed during the 12-month period ending June 30, 1992. Part 2, Civil Jury Cases Data, is a sample of about 6,500 jury trial cases disposed over the same time period. Data collected include information about litigants, case type, disposition type, processing time, case outcome, and award amounts for civil jury cases.
Curated
Restricted
Civil Justice Survey of State Courts, 1996 (ICPSR 2883)
Released/updated on: 2011-11-02
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1996-01-01--1996-12-31
In 1996, the Bureau of Justice Statistics awarded a grant to the National Center for State Courts to gather detailed information on tort, contract, and real property rights trial cases in 45 jurisdictions chosen to represent the 75 most populous counties in the nation. The result is this survey, which is a systematic examination of civil trial cases disposed in state general jurisdiction courts. The study expands the 1992 civil jury study, CIVIL JUSTICE SURVEY OF STATE COURTS, 1992 (ICPSR 6587), by specifically sampling bench and jury trial cases. Information gathered includes the type of case, the presence of legal representation, the type of litigation, the amount of compensatory damages awarded, the amount of punitive damages awarded, and case processing time.
Curated
Restricted
Civil Justice Survey of State Courts, 2001 (ICPSR 3957)
Released/updated on: 2011-11-03
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2001-01-01--2001-12-31
This data collection examined general civil cases (torts, contracts, and real property) disposed of by bench or jury trial in the nation's 75 most populous counties in 2001. Information reported includes the type of case, types of plaintiffs and defendants, trial winners, amount of total damages awarded, amount of punitive damages awarded, and case processing time. This is the third in a series of data collections begun in 1992: CIVIL JUSTICE SURVEY OF STATE COURTS, 1992 (ICPSR 6587), and CIVIL JUSTICE SURVEY OF STATE COURTS, 1996 (ICPSR 2883).
Curated
Restricted
Civil Justice Survey of State Courts, 2005 (ICPSR 23862)
Released/updated on: 2011-11-02
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2005-01-01--2005-12-31
The Civil Justice Survey of State Courts (CJSSC), 2005 is a systematic examination of general civil (that is, tort, contract, and real property) cases disposed of by bench or jury trial in a national sample of state courts of general jurisdiction in 2005. This study expands on the 1992, 1996, and 2001 CJSSC by collecting a nationally representative sample of bench and jury trials concluded in 156 urban, suburban, and rural counties. Prior iterations of the CJSSC focused on general civil cases concluded by bench or jury trial in a sample of the nation's 75 most populous counties. The 2005 CJSSC was designed and carried out by the National Center for State Courts. Westat designed the national sampling framework for this survey. The data collection produced two datasets. The first contains information on general civil (tort, contract, and real property) cases disposed of by bench or jury trial in a national sample of counties in 2005. Detailed case level information was obtained on these trials, including types of civil cases litigated at trial, characteristics of litigants involved in trials, who wins in trials, compensatory award amounts, punitive damages, case processing times, and post-trial litigation. The other data file contains aggregate information on the number of general civil trial and nontrial dispositions that occurred in 2005 in CJSCC counties that had the capacity to provide these data. This is the fourth in a series of data collections begun in 1992 [CIVIL JUSTICE SURVEY OF STATE COURTS, 1992 (ICPSR 6587), CIVIL JUSTICE SURVEY OF STATE COURTS, 1996 (ICPSR 2883), and CIVIL JUSTICE SURVEY OF STATE COURTS, 2001 (ICPSR 3957)].
Curated
Partially restricted
Civil Justice Survey of Trials on Appeal, 2005 (ICPSR 32501)
Released/updated on: 2012-01-10
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2005-01-01--2010-12-31
The Bureau of Justice Statistics' (BJS) Civil Justice Survey of Trials on Appeal (CJSTA) was based on 26,950 general civil (i.e., tort, contract, and real property) cases that were disposed by bench or jury trial in 156 counties participating in the 2005 Civil Justice Survey of State Courts (ICPSR 23862). Subsequently, 3,970 of those cases were appealed to 84 appellate courts in 35 states. This data collection examines civil bench and jury trials concluded in state trial courts in 2005 that were appealed to an intermediate appellate court or court of last resort. It is the first report based on data collected in the Bureau of Justice Statistics' (BJS) Civil Justice Survey of Trials on Appeal (CJSTA). The CJSTA included information from court records on civil trials concluded in 2005 and tracked the subsequent appeals from 2005 through March 2010. Information collected included the types of civil cases appealed, appeals dismissed or withdrawn before being decided on the merits, and appeals resulting in the trial court decision being reversed or affirmed. The time from the filing of an appeal to final appellate court disposition was also measured.
Curated
Impact of Prisoner Litigation Reform, 1992-2000 [United States] (ICPSR 20354)
Released/updated on: 2008-04-10
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1992-04-01--2000-12-31
In 1996, the United States Congress enacted two policies to regulate the use of the legal system by state prisoners. They were the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) and the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA). The purpose of this research project was to examine whether the PLRA and the AEDPA had their intended effects of reducing the number of Section 1983 lawsuits and habeas corpus petitions, respectively, at both the national and circuit court levels. The researchers obtained data, from the Research and Statistics Division of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, on the number of civil rights suits and the number of habeas corpus petitions filed by state prisoners in district courts from April 1992 to December 2000. These data were organized into monthly increments. Dataset 1, Civil Rights Suits Filed, contains 105 cases, and Dataset 2, Habeas Corpus Petitions Filed, also contains 105 cases. The trends in civil rights suits filed (Dataset 1) and habeas corpus petitions filed (Dataset 2) were measured by the number of petitions filed per 10,000 state prisoners. Filing rates were measured at the level of district courts, grouped together by the circuit court that has jurisdiction over them.
Variables in Dataset 1, Civil Rights Suits Filed, include filing date and the number of civil rights suits filed per 10,000 state prisoners at the national level as well as for district courts within each of the 11 circuits and the District of Columbia. An intervention flag variable is also included. Variables in Dataset 2, Habeas Corpus Petitions Filed, include filing date and the number of habeas corpus petitions filed per 10,000 state prisoners at the national level, as well as for district courts within each of the 11 circuits and the District of Columbia. A pulse flag variable and two intervention flag variables are also included.
Curated
Jury Verdicts Database for Cook County, Illinois, and All Counties in California, 1960-1984 (ICPSR 6232)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois
This data collection contains information on jury verdict civil cases in Cook County, Illinois, and all counties in California. The RAND Corporation's Institute for Criminal Justice began this study in the early 1980s in response to widespread public interest in the magnitude of dollar verdicts returned in civil cases. The goal was to record salient information found in court reporter publications to allow for a wide range of future research. Two such publications were chosen because of their favorable reputations and because they both dated back to 1960: the "Cook County Jury Verdict Reporter" of Chicago, Illinois, and "Jury Verdicts Weekly" of Santa Rosa, California. The collection of data for this study was conducted in two phases. Phase I included cases from 1960-1979, and Phase II coded cases from 1980-1984, including a small number of cases from 1985. In both phases, only cases in which a jury reached a definitive outcome (including deadlocked or hung juries) were included. In Phase I, only San Francisco County cases from the California reporter publication were included. In Phase II, all California counties were included. For all cases in Phase I, a Main Form was completed that included jurisdiction, court type, dates of incidents and trial, information about parties involved, trial occurrences, outcome of trial, awards, and fees. In addition to this Main Form, at least one of nine different case-type forms was completed: Common Carrier-Passenger Form, Dram Shop Form, Injuries on Property/Attractive Nuisance Form, Malpractice Form, Miscellaneous Form, Products Liability Form, Street Hazards/Highway Construction Form, Traffic/Pedestrian/Rider Form, and Work Injuries and FELA Form. These forms contained questions regarding the behavior of each party in the case and other characteristics and facts relevant to the case. A Jury Verdicts Form was completed for all cases in Phase II. This form picked up general case-level and defendant-specific data such as dates and length of trial, case outcome, original number of parties involved, and collapsing of multiple defendants into one case. For each plaintiff, a Plaintiff Information Form was filled out containing general plaintiff information such as losses claimed and the coder's assessment of the degree of the plaintiff's comparative negligence. This form also indicated which of the loss forms was coded for this plaintiff (only one loss form was completed for each plaintiff): Death Action, Personal Injuries, or Money Damages. Each form contained basic information about the outcome of the case, specific damages claimed by the plaintiff, and loss-specific data. Additionally, an Ancillary Action Form was completed for any associated claims that were adjudicated at the time of the main case, such as counter-suits by defendants. The questions on this form were the same as those on the main Jury Verdicts Form. Finally, this study includes an Integrated Jury Verdicts Database (Part 33) containing data from both phases to permit easier analysis of data from all years. This database contains five sections: (1) the basic trial information, which includes the trial dates and lengths, reporter source, and jurisdiction, (2) the main case information, which includes more detailed data about the case such as number of parties involved, case type, types of losses claimed, and total compensatory and punitive awards, (3) information about the first ancillary action, (4) information about the second ancillary action, and (5) a listing of all the forms used.
Curated
Restricted
LAPD's TEAMS II: The Impact of a Police Integrity Early Intervention System, Los Angeles, California, 2000-2015 (ICPSR 36574)
Released/updated on: 2018-09-17
Geographic coverage: United States, Los Angeles, California
Time period: 2000-01-01--2015-12-31
These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.
This research was an evaluation of the Los Angeles Police Department's (LAPD) Training Evaluation and Management System II (TEAMS II) Early Intervention System conducted by Justice and Security Strategies, Inc. TEAMS II was designed to identify officers at-risk for engaging in future problematic behavior. This system was mandated as part of the Consent Decree (Section II) that was formally entered into on June 15, 2001 between the U.S. Department of Justice and the LAPD. Justice and Security Strategies, Inc. research staff worked with the Information Technology Bureau to obtain and analyze TEAMS II data, conducted informal interviews with officers, sergeants, civilians, command staff, and technologists involved with TEAMS II, and worked with the TEAMS II contractors to examine and provide recommendations.
The data collection includes 3 Stata data files. The concentration analysis dataset (TEAMS-Concentration-Analysis-FINAL-v2.dta) with 143 variables for 15,710 cases, the regression-discontinuity dataset (TEAMS-Regression-Discontinuity-FINAL.dta) with 98 variables for 297,779 cases, and the time series dataset (TEAMS-Time-Series-FINAL.dta) with 43 variables for 192 cases. Demographic variables included as part of this data collection include officer age, gender, ethnicity, education level, and total number of officers employed by demographics.
Curated
Massachusetts Superior Court Files, 1859-1959 (ICPSR 7776)
Released/updated on: 2010-05-14
Geographic coverage: United States, Massachusetts
Time period: 1859-01-01--1959-12-31
This dataset contains data about case records created between 1859-1959 in the Massachusetts Superior Court (and its predecessors) for two Massachusetts counties. Part 1 contains data for 1,952 criminal cases with 52 descriptive variables, including: type of crime, year crime was committed, pleas, sentences, appeals, size of file, and demographic characteristics of victim and defendant (e.g., gender, status, residence, and occupation). Eighteen variables describe and rate each case's historical interest. Part 2 contains data on 1,968 civil (law, equity, and divorce) cases, with 82 descriptive variables, such as: relationship between parties, type of complaint, relief sought, disposition, relief granted, number of claims, damages awarded, size of file, and demographic characteristics of plaintiff and defendant (e.g., gender, status, residence, and occupation). Ten variables describe and rate each case's historical interest. In both data files, criteria for historical interest coding include: (1) inherent interest, such as offenses that are not routine (e.g., white-collar crimes, sexual crimes, and serious felonies), parties who are inherently interesting (e.g., famous persons, institutional defendants, and law enforcement personnel), and legal proceedings that are inherently interesting (e.g., alleged violations of prosecutorial or judicial discretion), (2) contexts that are inherently interesting, and (3) extraordinary documentation, such as those that shed light on the legal system (e.g., pardons or letters from citizens' committees), shed light on social history (e.g., the testimony of a woman who moved to the city and inadvertently ended up in a brothel), provide legal/procedural information (e.g., the details of search or a technical challenge to an indictment), and describe public or political history (e.g., milk inspection or zoning laws).
Curated
Restricted
The Role of Indigent Defense for Defendants with Mental Health Disorders, New York, 2013-2015 (ICPSR 36736)
Released/updated on: 2024-05-29
Geographic coverage: United States, New York (state)
Time period: 2013-10-01--2015-05-01
The incarceration of people with mental health disorders represents a significant public health crisis. People with mental health needs are over-represented in the justice system and in 2009 alone there were an estimated 2 million bookings of individuals with mental health disorders into United States jails, equivalent to approximately 18 percent of all admissions (Steadman et al., 2009).
While some indigent defense offices employ social workers or staff with clinical training to assess client needs and advise attorneys on defense strategies, there are far more public defenders that do not have access to these resources. While millions of people with mental illness are arrested every year, there continues to be challenges inherent in representing this population or the training and support needs of public defenders.
This project addresses examines the needs of defendants with mental health disorders and the specific challenges that attorneys face when representing these individuals. Specifically, the Vera Institute of Justice (Vera) and Policy Research Associates Inc. (PRA) used multiple methods to assess the dual perspective of defendants and defenders concerning:
- The link between mental health and justice involvement
- Perceptions of the attorney-client relationship and satisfaction with case outcomes
- The needs of defendants with mental health disorders
- How a client's mental health impacts defenders' strategy
Curated
Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), 1987-1990: [United States] (ICPSR 9485)
Released/updated on: 2005-11-04
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1970-01-01--1990-12-31
The objectives of this data collection were to capture the histories of complex, multiparty, political legal disputes, to measure political "chill," and to test a model of crossinstitutional disputing. A "Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation" (SLAPP) was defined as a lawsuit filed against citizens or groups exercising the right to petition the government. Each case violated the First Amendment right "to petition the government for a redress of grievances." The Petition Clause, as it is called, is a fundamental civil right, guaranteeing and encouraging citizen involvement in all aspects of American political decision-making and governance. The collection includes information on the petition action, political context, amount of award or settlement, specific damages requested (no money vs. a specified amount), attorney status, amount of court costs, attorney fees, interest, and number of individuals and organizations involved in the suit. Also included are several sociodemographic variables describing the parties to the litigation, such as marital status, employment, occupation, county and state of residence, political party orientation and membership, and interest group membership.
Curated
Restricted
Supplemental Survey of Civil Appeals, 2001 (ICPSR 4539)
Released/updated on: 2011-11-02
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2001-01-01--2005-12-31
The 2001 Supplemental Survey of Civil Appeals is a follow-up to the CIVIL JUSTICE SURVEY OF STATE COURTS, 2001 (ICPSR 3957) which examined 8,311 general civil cases (e.g., tort, contract, and real property) concluded by bench or jury trial in a sample of 46 of the nation's 75 most populous counties in 2001. These cases were then weighted to represent the 11,908 general civil trials concluded in the nation's 75 most populous counties. Data from the 2001 Civil Trial Survey were used to produce several Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) reports describing the characteristics of civil litigation in state courts. The 2001 Supplemental Survey of Civil Appeals tracks every general civil case concluded by bench or jury trial in 2001 in the 46 surveyed counties that were subsequently appealed to an intermediate appellate court or court of last resort. In the 2001 Civil Justice Survey of State Courts information was collected for every general civil trial concluded in 43 of the 46 selected counties. In these counties, the 2001 Supplemental Survey of Civil Appeals collected information on all general trials that produced an appeal. In the three remaining counties, (Cook County, Philadelphia County, and Bergen County), the appeals survey obtained information for both those general civil trials concluded in 2001 that were subsequently appealed and, in addition, collected information for those general civil appeals that were not captured at the trial court level. The 2001 Supplemental Survey of Civil Appeals tracks data on general civil appeals that originated from 46 of the nation's 75 most populous counties. Unlike the 2001 Civil Justice Survey of State Courts, cases were not weighted to represent appeals in the nation's 75 most populous counties. The appeals were followed until they were withdrawn, dismissed, or decided on the merits in the appellate courts. All appeals were tracked until April 30, 2005. Appeals not disposed on that date are identified as pending. Overall four appellate datasets were produced from this survey.
Curated
Survey of American Prisons and Jails, 1979 (ICPSR 7899)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Indiana, Wyoming, Utah, Arizona, Montana, Kentucky, California, Kansas, Florida, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Mississippi, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, Connecticut, Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, Idaho, Oregon, Vermont, United States, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Maine, Alabama, Arkansas, Washington, South Carolina, Nebraska, Massachusetts, Colorado, Missouri, Alaska, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Nevada, District of Columbia, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Hawaii, Minnesota, New York (state), New Jersey, Michigan, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Louisiana, Ohio
Time period: 1979-01-01--1979-12-31
This data collection contains information gathered in a two-part survey that was designed to assess institutional conditions in state and federal prisons and in halfway houses. It was one of a series of data-gathering efforts undertaken during the 1970s to assist policymakers in assessing and overcoming deficiencies in the nation's correctional institutions. This particular survey was conducted in response to a mandate set forth in the Crime Control Act of 1976. Data were gathered via self-enumerated questionnaires that were mailed to the administrators of all 558 federal and state prisons and all 405 community-based prerelease facilities in existence in the United States in 1979. Part 1 contains the results of the survey of state and federal adult correctional systems, and Part 2 contains the results of the survey of community-based prerelease facilities. The two files contain similar variables designed to tap certain key aspects of confinement: (1) inmate (or resident) counts by sex and by security class, (2) age of facility and rated capacity, (3) spatial density, occupancy, and hours confined for each inmate's (or resident's) confinement quarters, (4) composition of inmate (or resident) population according to race, age, and offense type, (5) inmate (or resident) labor and earnings, (6) race, age, and sex characteristics of prison (or half-way house) staff, and (7) court orders by type of order and pending litigation. Other data (contained in both files) include case ID number, state ID number, name of facility, and operator of facility (e.g., federal, state, local, or private).
Curated
Survey of Households in Five Judicial Districts of the United States: A Civil Litigation Project, 1977-1979 (ICPSR 9743)
Released/updated on: 1992-05-12
Geographic coverage: United States, New Mexico, California, Wisconsin, South Carolina, Pennsylvania
Time period: 1977-01-01--1979-12-31
This data collection is based on the household screening survey conducted by the Civil Litigation Research Project (CLRP) in 1980. The survey was conducted in five federal judicial districts in the United States: Eastern Wisconsin, Eastern Pennsylvania, South Carolina, New Mexico, and Central California. The primary objective of the study was to identify individuals involved in disputes that might have become lawsuits. The major area of investigation was claiming behavior. The dataset also includes 54 households from the "screened experiment," whereby households known to have been involved in lawsuits were contacted. Demographic variables include the age, sex, education, occupation, and union status of the chief wage earner. Also included are the respondent's sex, race, and family income. Questions were asked about consumer problems, problems with persons who owed the respondent money, discrimination problems, debt problems, property-related problems, mortgage-related problems, landlord-tenant problems, problems with government benefits, and post-divorce problems. The unit of analysis is the household.
Curated
Survey of Tort Litigants in Three State Courts, 1989-1990: [United States] (ICPSR 9699)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States, Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania
Time period: 1989-01-01--1990-12-31
This survey examines the experiences of tort litigants in three state courts: (1) Bucks County, Pennsylvania, (2) Prince George's County, Maryland, and (3) Fairfax County, Virginia. The survey was administered using a Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) system. The most critical aspect of the CATI skip logic is that respondents were interviewed using different modules depending on their role in the dispute (plaintiff vs. defendant), the state/county, and the mode of resolution of their lawsuit. Questions were asked about the nature of the dispute, the plaintiff's financial losses, the defendant's report of damages claimed, events leading up to the lawsuit and finding a lawyer, arbitration cases, settlement conference cases, trial cases, bilateral settlement cases, costs of the lawsuit, social background, and overall evaluation of the experience.