Constructing two-sided simultaneous confidence intervals for multinomial proportions for small counts in a large number of cells

Confidence intervals for multinomial proportions are often constructed using large-sample methods that rely on expected cell counts of 5 or greater. In situations that give rise to a large number of categories, the cell counts may not be of adequate size to ensure the appropriate overall coverage probability and alternative methods of construction have been proposed. Sison and Glaz (1995) developed a method of constructing two-sided confidence intervals for multinomial proportions that is based on the doubly truncated Poisson distribution and their method performs well when the cell counts are fairly equally dispersed over a large number of categories. In fact, the Sison and Glaz (1995) intervals appear to outperform other methods of simultaneous construction in terms of coverage probabilities and interval length in these situations. To make the method available to researchers, we have developed a SAS macro to construct the intervals proposed by Sison and Glaz (1995).

Criminal Law and Procedure

In the field of Criminal Law and Procedure, the Tennessee Supreme Court might be said to have completed a normal, even typical, year; some new law was announced, and much existing law was reiterated and reshaped. The Court\u27s respect for local precedent persisted undiminished. No Tennessee case was directly overruled, and Tennessee precedents were closely adhered to when available. Not a single dissent appeared in the cases discussed in this article. The brevity of appellate opinions--particularly their highly condensed fact paragraphs--makes critical analysis of them a difficult and somewhat risky procedure. Nevertheless, an attempt has been made in this article to add the analytical dimension to the descriptive one. Although one might like a somewhat more detailed treatment in some of the opinions, the holdings of the Court in this field--most of them written by Judge Prewitt--were usually sensible and desirable

Formal Requirements for Creation of the Oil and Gas Lessee\u27s Interest

The practice of the courts of employing almost as many varying and contradictory descriptions of the nature of the lessee\u27s interest under the usual oil and gas lease as there are petroleum producing states has a historical origin which is clearly traceable. In the latter half of the nineteenth century as each of the known oil bearing states was slowly explored and developed for petroleum, it fell the lot of their courts to solve the complicated legal problems arising in this new and unique industry. Equipped with but little accurate scientific knowledge about the physical behavior of oil and gas, and often with no direct legal precedent, these courts found their task a difficult one. It is not surprising that pioneer oil and gas judges turned for guidance to doctrines of common law real property covering situations seemingly analogous to those confronting them. A gradual, but haphazard, reception of real property terminology into the law of oil and gas followed. But the peg has never really fit the hole. No one term in real property law has been found which for all purposes properly describes the oil and gas lessee\u27s interest. Thus, in casting about for real property precedent to govern one petroleum law question the courts of a state came up with one description of the lessee\u27s interest; however, with reference to different issue to be resolved, the quest for common law analogy often yielded quite another characterization. This tendency, when repeated through the years in the several petroleum producing jurisdictions, has produced a markedly conflicting nomenclature. Thus in cases concerned with formal requirements for the creation of the oil and gas lessee\u27s interest the courts have, at one time or another, described this interest as a determinable fee, a profit a prendre, an incorporeal hereditament, more than an incorporeal hereditament, a free-hold, an interest in land, not an interest in land, a chattel interests a license, not a license, personal property and real property.\u2

Personal Property and Sales

The similarity of the subject matter, together with the paucity of cases in each field, has made it advisable to combine the personal property and sales cases in one article. Though the total number of cases falling within these fields was small, the proportion of novel and interesting issues raised was high. This article is an attempt to analyze as well as describe the significant cases decided in this area within the past year