Hamilton County Judges
June 20, 2011
Case Study #3
Case Problem: Hamilton County Judges
Three major court systems in Hamilton County were reviewed in depth, and case information from the Common Pleas, Domestic Relations, and Municipal Courts were reviewed. This study compiles information from 38 Judges who had a total of 182,908 cases presented to them over a three year period. This study shows the number of cases that were disposed, appealed, and reversed. This study is to aid in determining which judges have a greater proficiency trying cases and their verdicts stand as rendered, rather than the verdicts being appealed or reversed. Each judges case load was reviewed and the statistics were determined by how many cases have been appealed, reversed or a conjunction of both. This information will help determine the judges who have made the least, as well as the most errors, while serving in the Hamilton County Court System over the three year period. This study will show that for all the disposed cases in the Hamilton County Court System during the 3 year evaluation period, the Common Pleas Court the probability of a case being appealed and reversed is 0.1129 (11.29%); Domestic Relations Courts probability of a case being appealed and reversed is 0.1604 (16.04%); Municipal Court probability of a case being appealed and reversed is 0.2080(20.80%).
The probability of a case being appealed, per judge is: (P) indicating Probability
Common Pleas Court Judges: (P) of Appeal per Judge (P) of Reversal per Judge (P) of Reversal given an Appeal, per Judge Fred Cartolano 0.045110 0.003951 0.087591 | Thomas Crush 0.035291 0.002966 0.084034 | Patrick Dinkelacker 0.034976 0.006359 0.181818 | Timothy Hogan
Case Study #3
Case Problem: Hamilton County Judges
Three major court systems in Hamilton County were reviewed in depth, and case information from the Common Pleas, Domestic Relations, and Municipal Courts were reviewed. This study compiles information from 38 Judges who had a total of 182,908 cases presented to them over a three year period. This study shows the number of cases that were disposed, appealed, and reversed. This study is to aid in determining which judges have a greater proficiency trying cases and their verdicts stand as rendered, rather than the verdicts being appealed or reversed. Each judges case load was reviewed and the statistics were determined by how many cases have been appealed, reversed or a conjunction of both. This information will help determine the judges who have made the least, as well as the most errors, while serving in the Hamilton County Court System over the three year period. This study will show that for all the disposed cases in the Hamilton County Court System during the 3 year evaluation period, the Common Pleas Court the probability of a case being appealed and reversed is 0.1129 (11.29%); Domestic Relations Courts probability of a case being appealed and reversed is 0.1604 (16.04%); Municipal Court probability of a case being appealed and reversed is 0.2080(20.80%).
The probability of a case being appealed, per judge is: (P) indicating Probability
Common Pleas Court Judges: (P) of Appeal per Judge (P) of Reversal per Judge (P) of Reversal given an Appeal, per Judge Fred Cartolano 0.045110 0.003951 0.087591 | Thomas Crush 0.035291 0.002966 0.084034 | Patrick Dinkelacker 0.034976 0.006359 0.181818 | Timothy Hogan