IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/igg/jsds00/v8y2017i1p65-76.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Legal Advocacy Experience Within the US Supreme Court on Trial Decision Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Michael D'Rosario

    (Department of Finance, Deakin Business School, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia)

Abstract

Can advocacy experience differentials be used in formulating a model to predict trial outcomes in the US Supreme Court? In recent years, a number of studies have considered the role of experience before the Supreme Court in the determination of trial outcomes. The work of Sheehan, Mishler and Songer supports the assertion that trial experience possessed by trial lawyers is associated with disproportionate rates of success. McGuire is a significant study into the impact of the experience of competing trial lawyers on judicial decision making. The study identified the experience differentials of lawyers and sought to determine the impact of these differentials on trial outcomes. The study found that trial experience possessed by trial lawyers was associated with favourable trial outcomes. The current study extends upon McGuire, assessing the robustness of the original study employing a series of more advanced parametric estimation techniques. The study then uses the McGuire logistic model framework to develop a model of prediction, employing a backward propagation, multilayer perceptron network model.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael D'Rosario, 2017. "The Impact of Legal Advocacy Experience Within the US Supreme Court on Trial Decision Outcomes," International Journal of Strategic Decision Sciences (IJSDS), IGI Global, vol. 8(1), pages 65-76, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:igg:jsds00:v:8:y:2017:i:1:p:65-76
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/IJSDS.2017010105
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:igg:jsds00:v:8:y:2017:i:1:p:65-76. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journal Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.igi-global.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.