Litigation Outcomes in State and Federal Courts: A Statistical Portrait

U.S. Juries Grow Tougher on Plaintiffs in Lawsuits, the New York Times page-one headline reads. The story details how, in 1992, plaintiffs won 52 percent of the personal injury cases decided by jury verdicts, a decline from the 63 percent plaintiff success rate in 1989. The sound-byte explanations follow, including the notion that juries have learned that they, as part of the general population, ultimately pay the costs of high verdicts. Similar stories, reporting both increases and decreases in jury award levels, regularly make headlines. Jury Verdict Research, Inc. (JVR), a commercial service that sells case outcome information, often is the source of the stories. The stories highlight a major gap in our knowledge of the legal system. Reported aggregate data tend to be exaggerated or incorrect. For example, the figures reported in the Times article almost certainly inflate plaintiff success rates for 1989 and report a time trend that probably does not exist. In an era when court reform and tort reform are constantly on the public policy agenda, the need for accurate national data about the litigation system is more important than ever. This Article supplies the first comprehensive national assessment of litigation outcomes in state and federal courts. It uses data gathered by the National Center for State Courts and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. Both data sources are national in scope and derive their information directly from court clerks\u27 offices. The data portray a litigation system with case outcome patterns that differ from the patterns based on less comprehensive sources. The principal findings in this Article are: (1) plaintiff win rates in jury trials in state and federal court are strikingly similar; (2) award levels are much higher in federal court than in state court; (3) federal courts handle a relatively small fraction of the jury trials, but they distribute a surprisingly large percentage of the funds awarded in jury trials; (4) there probably is no significant time trend in plaintiff win rates in federal court jury trials; and (5) cases at almost every stage of disposition proceed more slowly through state courts than through federal courts

The Predictability of Punitive Damages

Using one year of jury trial outcomes from 45 of the nation\u27s most populous counties, this article shows a strong and statistically significant correlation between compensatory and punitive damages. These findings are replicated in 25 years of punitive damages awards from Cook County, Illinois, and California. In addition, we find no evidence that punitive damages awards are more likely when individuals sue businesses than when individuals sue individuals. With respect to award frequency, juries rarely award punitive damages and appear to be especially reluctant to do so in the areas of law that have captured the most attention, products liability and medical malpractice. Punitive damages are most frequently awarded in business/contract cases and intentional tort cases. The frequency-of-award findings are consistent with all major studies of punitive damages

Macrophage Activation and Polarization: Nomenclature and Experimental Guidelines

Description of macrophage activation is currently contentious and confusing. Like the biblical Tower of Babel, macrophage activation encompasses a panoply of descriptors used in different ways. The lack of consensus on how to define macrophage activation in experiments in vitro and in vivo impedes progress in multiple ways, including the fact that many researchers still consider there to be only two types of activated macrophages, often termed M1 and M2. Here, we describe a set of standards encompassing three principles—the source of macrophages, definition of the activators, and a consensus collection of markers to describe macrophage activation—with the goal of unifying experimental standards for diverse experimental scenarios. Collectively, we propose a common framework for macrophage-activation nomenclature

The Predictability of Punitive Damages

Using one year of jury trial outcomes from 45 of the nation\u27s most populous counties, this article shows a strong and statistically significant correlation between compensatory and punitive damages. These findings are replicated in 25 years of punitive damages awards from Cook County, Illinois, and California. In addition, we find no evidence that punitive damages awards are more likely when individuals sue businesses than when individuals sue individuals. With respect to award frequency, juries rarely award punitive damages and appear to be especially reluctant to do so in the areas of law that have captured the most attention, products liability and medical malpractice. Punitive damages are most frequently awarded in business/contract cases and intentional tort cases. The frequency-of-award findings are consistent with all major studies of punitive damages

Cellular Infiltration and Cytokine Expression Correlate with Fistulizing State in Crohn's Disease ▿

The purpose of this study was to determine the degree of infiltration of different cell subpopulations (tissue dendritic macrophages, T-helper cells, cytotoxic T lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophils, and B cells) and the expression of the cytokines interleukin-12 (IL-12) and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) in inflamed and noninflamed resected tissues from Crohn's disease (CD) and non-CD patients. Twenty-one resected full-thickness intestinal tissue specimens representing 13 subjects (8 CD and 5 non-CD patients) were included in this study. Sections of 20 μm in thickness were cut and then stained using immunohistochemistry. The sections were analyzed using confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). Patterns of staining for inflamed CD and noninflamed CD tissues versus non-CD tissues demonstrated significant differences in the macrophage and T-helper subpopulations. Surprisingly, the T-helper subset was decreased significantly in the inflamed CD sections compared to the noninflamed CD and non-CD sections. The staining patterns also suggested differences in the expression of both IL-12 and TNF-α between the groups, with cytokine overexpression directly relating to the fistulizing state in CD patients. Cytokine expression is upregulated in chronic CD patients; therefore, the degree of inflammation and tissue damage in CD is dependent on the expression of specific cytokines within the tissue. Differentiation of cell subpopulations may be important for establishing a direct relationship with each state of CD (inflammatory, stricturing, and fistulizing states)

TH2 Cytokines and Allergic Challenge Induce Ym1 Expression in Macrophages by a STAT6-dependent Mechanism

The diverse functions of macrophages as participants in innate and acquired immune responses are regulated by the specific milieu of environmental factors, cytokines, and other signaling molecules that are encountered at sites of inflammation. Microarray analysis of the transcriptional response of mouse peritoneal macrophages to the T(H)2 cytokine interleukin-4 (IL-4) identified Ym1 and arginase as the most highly up-regulated genes, exhibiting more than 68- and 88-fold induction, respectively. Molecular characterization of the Ym1 promoter in transfected epithelial and macrophage cell lines revealed the presence of multiple signal transducers and activators of transcription 6 (STAT6) response elements that function in a combinatorial manner to mediate transcriptional responses to IL-4. The participation of STAT6 as an obligate component of protein complexes binding to these sites was established by analysis of nuclear extracts derived from STAT6-deficient macrophages. Macrophage expression of Ym1 was highly induced in vivo by an IL-4- and STAT6-dependent mechanism during the evolution of allergic peritonitis, supporting the biological relevance of the IL-4-dependent pathway characterized ex vivo in peritoneal macrophages. These studies establish Ym1 as a highly inducible STAT6-dependent transcript in T(H)2-biased inflammation and define Cis-active elements in the Ym1 promoter that are required for this transcriptional response.