State Appellate Court Adaptation to Caseload Increase, 1968-1984: (United States)

This data collection examines the impact of caseload pressures on both intermediate appellate courts and supreme courts for each state in the nation. The data describe in detail the changes made by appellate courts and supply information related to each change. These changes include (1) adding judge...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Marvell, Thomas (Author)
Contributors: Moody, Carlisle (Contributor)
Format: Electronic Research Data
Language:English
Published: [Erscheinungsort nicht ermittelbar] [Verlag nicht ermittelbar] 1988
In:Year: 1988
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:
court system
CRIMINAL justice system
judicial process
Forschungsdaten

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1840068736
003 DE-627
005 20230325055333.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 230324s1988 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.3886/ICPSR08262.v1  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1840068736 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1840068736 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Marvell, Thomas  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a State Appellate Court Adaptation to Caseload Increase, 1968-1984: (United States) 
264 1 |a [Erscheinungsort nicht ermittelbar]  |b [Verlag nicht ermittelbar]  |c 1988 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a This data collection examines the impact of caseload pressures on both intermediate appellate courts and supreme courts for each state in the nation. The data describe in detail the changes made by appellate courts and supply information related to each change. These changes include (1) adding judges, law clerks and staff attorneys, (2) expanding or creating intermediate appellate courts, (3) reducing panel size, (4) using summary procedures, (5) curtailing opinion practices by deciding cases without opinion or unpublished and memo opinions, and (6) curtailing oral argument length. 
540 |a ICPSR Terms of Use 
650 4 |a court system 
650 4 |a CRIMINAL justice system 
650 4 |a judicial process 
655 7 |a Forschungsdaten  |0 (DE-588)1098579690  |0 (DE-627)857755366  |0 (DE-576)469182156  |2 gnd-content 
700 1 |a Moody, Carlisle  |e MitwirkendeR  |4 ctb 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR08262.v1  |x Resolving-System  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4296816608 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1840068736 
LOK |0 005 20230324125345 
LOK |0 008 230324||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)ICPSR8262 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a foda  |a nacj 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw