Definition
Evidence shows that, contrary to what believed traditional legal theorists, judges when making decisions are not merely making a pure exercise of interpretation of the law. They are influenced by factors such as panel composition, material and nonmaterial benefits, pressure groups, etc., and may follow distinct trends. This chapter presents some models that explain judicial behavior or judicial decisions. Recent (and not so recent) empirical literature has been providing a rich debate in this still recent discussion.
Introduction: Why Care? Judicial Outcomes and Economic Performance
If judges have a substantial amount of discretion in deciding cases, then it is important to know the motives and the value systems which influence their exercise of discretion. (C. Hermann Pritchett 1968)
Coase (1960) taught us that courts and court outcomes – i.e., judicial decisions – impact the...
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bourreau-Dubois C, Doriat-Duban M, Ray JC (2014) Child support order: how do judges decide without guidelines? Evidence from France. Eur J Law Econ 38(3):431–452
Boyd CL, Epstein L, Martin AD (2010) Untangling the causal effects of sex on judging. Am J Polit Sci 54(2):389–411
Cameron CM, Kornhauser LA (2017) Rational choice attitudinalism? Eur J Law Econ 43:535–554
Casillas CJ, Enns PK, Wohlfarth PC (2011) How public opinion constrains the U.S. Supreme Court. Am J Polit Sci 55(1):74–88
Christmann R (2014) No judge, no job! Court errors and the contingent labor contract. Eur J Law Econ 38(3):409–429
Coase RH (1960) The problem of social cost. J Law Econ 3:1–44
Collins PM, Martinek WL (2010) Friends of the circuits: interest group influence on decision making in the U.S. courts of appeals. Soc Sci Q 91(2):397–414
Collins PM, Solowiej LA (2007) Interest group participation, and conflict competition, the U.S. Supreme Court. Law Soc Inq 32(4):955–984
Dyevre A (2016) Domestic judicial defiance and the authority of international legal regimes. Eur J Law Econ 44:453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-016-9551-2
Epstein L (2016) Some thoughts on the study of judicial behavior. William & Mary Law Review 57(6): 2017–2073
Epstein L, Kobylka JF (1992) The Supreme Court and legal change: abortion and the death penalty. Thornton H. Brooks series in American Law & Society. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill
Epstein L, Martin AD (2010) Does public opinion influence the Supreme Court? Possibly yes (but We’re not sure why). J Constit Law 12(2):263–281
Epstein L, Landes WM, Posner RA (2013) The behavior of federal judges. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Farhang S, Wawro G (2004) Institutional dynamics on the U.S. court of appeals: minority representation under panel decision making. J Law Econ Org 20(2):299–330
Fon V, Parisi F (2006) Judicial precedents in civil law systems: a dynamic analysis. Int Rev Law Econ 26:519–535
Garoupa N, Gomez-Pomar F, Grembi V (2013) Judging under political pressure: an empirical analysis of constitutional review voting in the Spanish Constitutional Court. J Law Econ Org 29(3):513–534
Giles MW, Blackstone B, Vining RL (2008) The Supreme Court in American democracy: unraveling the linkages between public opinion and judicial decision making. J Polit 70(2):293–306
Grezzana S, Ponczek V (2012) Gender bias at the Brazilian superior labor court. Braz Rev Econom 32(1):73–96
Harnay S, Marciano A (2004) Judicial conformity versus dissidence: an economic analysis of judicial precedent. Int Rev Law Econ 23:405–420
Josselin JM, Marciano A (1997) The paradox of leviathan: how to develop and contain the future European state? Eur J Law Econ 4(1):5–22
King KL, Greening M (2007) Gender justice or just gender? The role of gender in sexual assault decisions at the international criminal tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. Soc Sci Q 88(5):1049–1071
Lopes F, Azevedo PF (2017) Government appointment discretion and judicial independence: preference and opportunistic effects on Brazilian Courts. Working paper – Insper. Available on https://www.insper.edu.br/working-papers/working-papers-2017/government-appointment-discretion-and-judicial-independence-preference-and-opportunistic-effects-on-brazilian-courts/
Melcarne A (2017) Careerism and judicial behavior. Eur J Law Econ 44:1–24
Peresie JL (2005) Female judges matter: gender and collegial decision-making in the federal appellate courts. Yale Law J 114(7):1759–1790
Portuese A (2012) Law and economics of the European multilingualism. Eur J Law Econ 34(2):279–325
Posner RA (2008) How judges think. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Pritchett CH (1968) Public law and judicial behavior. J Polit 30:480–509
Richards D (2017) Lee Epstein, William M. Landes, Richard A. Posner: the behavior of federal judges: a theoretical and empirical study of rational choice. Eur J Law Econ 43:555–558
Schneider MR (2005) Judicial career incentives and court performance: an empirical study of the German labour courts of appeal. Eur J Law Econ 20(2):127–144
Schwartz A, Murchison MJ (2016) Judicial impartiality and independence in divided societies: an empirical analysis of the constitutional court of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Law Soc Rev 50(4):821–855
Sherwood RM (2004) Judicial performance: its economic impact in seven countries. Paper presented in the 8th annual conference da international society for new institutional economics (ISNIE), Tucson. Available on http://www.isnie.org
Smyth R (2005) The role of attitudinal, institutional and environmental factors in explaining variations in the dissent rate on the High Court of Australia. Aust J Polit Sci 40(4):519–540
Sunstein CR, Schkade D, Ellman LM, Sawicki A (2006) Are judges political? An empirical analysis of the federal judiciary. The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC
Tate CN (1983) The methodology of judicial behavior research: a review and critique. Polit Behav 5(1):51–82
Tridimas G, Tridimas T (2002) The European Court of Justice and the annulment of the tobacco advertisement directive: friend of national sovereignty or foe of public health? Eur J Law Econ 14(2):171–183
Tsaoussi A, Zervogianni E (2010) Judges as satisficers: a law and economics perspective on judicial liability. Eur J Law Econ 29(3):333–357
Vaubel R (2009) Constitutional courts as promoters of political centralization: lessons for the European Court of Justice. Eur J Law Econ 28(3):203–222
Weder B (1995) Legal systems and economic performance: the empirical evidence. In: Rowat M et al (eds) Judicial reform in Latin America and the Caribbean – proceedings of a World Bank Conference. World Bank technical paper number 280. The World Bank, Washington, DC
Yeung L, Azevedo PF (2015) Nem Robin Hood nem King John: testando o viés anti-credor e anti-devedor dos magistrados brasileiros. Econ Anal Law Rev 6(1):1–12
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
About this entry
Cite this entry
Yeung, L. (2019). Empirical Analysis of Judicial Decisions. In: Marciano, A., Ramello, G.B. (eds) Encyclopedia of Law and Economics. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7753-2_692
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7753-2_692
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-7752-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-7753-2
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences