The Supreme Court Computer

Scholarly article on Curt Flood\u27s lawsuit against major league baseball over the right to be a free agent

An Outside Educator Views Michigan\u27s Legal Education from the Inside

Harold J. Spaeth is a Michigan State University political science professor who has attracted considerable attention for his computer predictions of the outcomes of U.S. Supreme Court cases. Over the past seven years, his predictions are said to have had an accuracy rate of more than 93 percent. Spaeth\u27s approach is to analyze the voting records of justices to determine personal attitudes and other factors influencing their decisions. He says these voting records are usually more revealing than legal theories which may mask the underlaying motivations in the particular judgment. A U-M law student since the summer of 1979, the 50-year-old professor says a law degree will assist my future writing and research, and better equip me to do consulting work for attorneys who try cases before the Supreme Court. In the summer of 1979, after 25 years behind a podium, I became a student at the Law School. Call it role reversal with a vengeance. Now, 14 months and 45 credits later, some observations on the producers, products, and processes of legal education at the University of Michiga

ICD-11 for quality and safety: overview of the who quality and safety topic advisory group

This paper outlines the approach that the WHO's Family of International Classifications (WHO-FIC) network is undertaking to create ICD-11. We also outline the more focused work of the Quality and Safety Topic Advisory Group, whose activities include the following: (i) cataloguing existing ICD-9 and ICD-10 quality and safety indicators; (ii) reviewing ICD morbidity coding rules for main condition, diagnosis timing, numbers of diagnosis fields and diagnosis clustering; (iii) substantial restructuring of the health-care related injury concepts coded in the ICD-10 chapters 19/20, (iv) mapping of ICD-11 quality and safety concepts to the information model of the WHO's International Classification for Patient Safety and the AHRQ Common Formats; (v) the review of vertical chapter content in all chapters of the ICD-11 beta version and (vi) downstream field testing of ICD-11 prior to its official 2015 release. The transition from ICD-10 to ICD-11 promises to produce an enhanced classification that will have better potential to capture important concepts relevant to measuring health system safety and quality—an important use case for the classificatio

An Outside Educator Views Michigan\u27s Legal Education from the Inside

Harold J. Spaeth is a Michigan State University political science professor who has attracted considerable attention for his computer predictions of the outcomes of U.S. Supreme Court cases. Over the past seven years, his predictions are said to have had an accuracy rate of more than 93 percent. Spaeth\u27s approach is to analyze the voting records of justices to determine personal attitudes and other factors influencing their decisions. He says these voting records are usually more revealing than legal theories which may mask the underlaying motivations in the particular judgment. A U-M law student since the summer of 1979, the 50-year-old professor says a law degree will assist my future writing and research, and better equip me to do consulting work for attorneys who try cases before the Supreme Court. In the summer of 1979, after 25 years behind a podium, I became a student at the Law School. Call it role reversal with a vengeance. Now, 14 months and 45 credits later, some observations on the producers, products, and processes of legal education at the University of Michiga

Replication data for: The Norm of Consensus on the U.S. Supreme Court

For four decades scholars have sought to explain the rise of dissensus on the U.S. Supreme Court. While the specific explanations they offer vary, virtually all rest on a common story: During the 19th (and into the 20th) century, the Supreme Court followed a norm of consensus. That is, the justices may have privately disagreed over the outcomes of cases but masked their disagreement from the public by producing consensual opinions. The problem with this story is that its underlying assumption lacks an empirical basis. Simply put, there is no systematic evidence to show that a norm of consensus ever existed on the Court. We attempt to provide such evidence by turning to the docket books of Chief Justice Waite (1874-1888), and making the following argument: If a norm of consensus induced unanimity on Courts of by-gone eras, then the norm may have manifested itself through public unanimity in the face of private conference disagreements. Our investigation, which provides systematic support for this argument and thus for the existence of a norm of consensus, raises important questions about publicly -unified decision-making bodies, be they courts or other political organizations

Replication data for: Do Political Preferences Change? A Longitudinal Study of U.S. Supreme Court Justices

Do the political preferences of U.S. Supreme Court justices change over time? Judicial specialists are virtually unanimous in their response: The occasional anomaly not withstanding, most jurists evince consistent behavior over the course of their careers. Still, for all the research that presupposes the consistency of preferences, it is startling to find that scholars have yet to explore rigorously the assumption of stability. We fill this gap by describing the behavioral patterns of the 16 justices who sat on the U.S. Supreme Court for 10 or more terms, and began and completed their service sometime between the 1937 and 1993 terms. The data reveal that many experienced significant change over time—a result with important implications for virtually all longitudinal work on the Court

The Supreme Court in the American legal system /

Includes bibliographical references and indexes.Judicial policy making -- Approaches to judicial decision making -- The Supreme Court in American legal history -- Civil procedure -- Evidence -- Criminal procedure -- State courts -- The U.S. District Courts -- The U.S. Courts of Appeals -- Staffing the court -- Getting into court -- Supreme Court decision making -- Opinions and assignments -- The impact of judicial decisions