Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:16:19.631Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

More Tales of Two Courts: Exploring Changes in the “Dispute Settlement Function” of Trial Courts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Richard Lempert
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This article uses Friedman and Percival's (1976) longitudinal survey of the caseloads of two California courts as a vehicle for addressing two conceptual issues that must be resolved in studies of the dispute settlement function of courts. First, one must decide whether the focus of inquiry is on the way courts function (i.e., act) or on the function that courts fill for some larger community. The methodological implications of this decision are discussed. Second, one must decide what counts as judicial contributions to dispute settlement. Seven possible contributions are identified. This article then reanalyzes Friedman and Percival's data on the Alameda and San Benito County courts, controlling for adult population. Reanalysis indicates that these data do not support the conclusion that the courts Friedman and Percival studied became functionally less important to community dispute settlement with increasing socio-economic development. This portion of the article suggests possible causes of some of the patterns observed, and discusses some of the problems that arise in working with longitudinal data culled from court dockets.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , Fall 1978 , pp. 91 - 138
Copyright
Copyright © 1978 Law and Society Association.

Footnotes

*

I would like to thank Shari Seidman Diamond, Lawrence Friedman, Thomas Green, Robert Percival, David Seidman, and Francis Zemans for commenting on earlier drafts of this paper. I believe this version has benefitted substantially from their remarks. I would also like to thank Peter Ward for his aid in exploring the data and Kenneth Gerver for his research assistance. Work on this paper was supported by the Cook Funds of the University of Michigan Law School.

References

DANZIG, Richard (1973) “Toward the Creation of a Complementary, Decentralized System of Criminal Justice,” 26 Stanford Law Review 1.Google Scholar
FRIEDMAN, Lawrence (1975) “San Benito 1890: Legal Snapshot of a County,” 27 Stanford Law Review 687.Google Scholar
FRIEDMAN, Lawrence and Robert, PERCIVAL (1976) “A Tale of Two Courts: Litigation in Alameda and San Benito Counties,” 10 Law & Society Review 267.Google Scholar
GALANTER, Marc (1974) “Why the ‘Haves’ Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change,” 9 Law & Society Review 95.Google Scholar
GIBBS, James L. (1963) “The Kpelle Moot: A Therapeutic Model for the Informal Settlement of Disputes,” 33 Africa 1.Google Scholar
GLUCKMAN, Max (1955) The Judicial Process Among the Barotse of Northern Rhodesia. Manchester: University Press.Google Scholar
JOHNSON, Earl (1977) “A Preliminary Analysis of Alternative Strategies for Processing Civil Disputes,” Report prepared pursuant to LEAA Grant No. 75NI-99-0069.Google Scholar
MACAULAY, Stewart (1963) “Non-Contractual Relations in Business: A Preliminary Study,” 28 American Sociological Review 55.Google Scholar
MACAULAY, Stewart (1966) Law and the Balance of Power: The Automobile Manufacturers and Their Dealers. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
NADER, Laura (1969) “Styles of Court Procedure: To Make the Balance,” in Nader, L. (ed.) Law in Culture and Society. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
RHEINSTEIN, Max (1954) Max Weber on Law in Economy and Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
ROSS, H. Laurence (1970) Settled Out of Court: The Social Process of Insurance Claims Adjustment. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
TRUBEK, David (1972) “Max Weber on Law and the Rise of Capitalism,” 1972 Wisconsin Law Review 720.Google Scholar
YNGVESSON, Barbara and Patricia, HENNESSEY (1975) “Small Claims, Complex Disputes: A Review of the Small Claims Literature,” 9 Law and Society Review 219.Google Scholar