Judicial Procedural Involvement (JPI): A Metric for Judges’ Role in Civil Litigation, Settlement, and Access to Justice

We examine judges’ role in civil litigation by studying empirically the relationship between judicial procedural involvement (JPI) and lawsuits’ mode of disposition (MoD). Furthermore, we propose JPI as a metric for the allocation of judicial attention to litigants. Applying the framework to Israeli...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of law and society 2020-09, Vol.47 (3), p.468-498
Hauptverfasser: Sela, Ayelet, Gabay‐Egozi, Limor
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 498
container_issue 3
container_start_page 468
container_title Journal of law and society
container_volume 47
creator Sela, Ayelet
Gabay‐Egozi, Limor
description We examine judges’ role in civil litigation by studying empirically the relationship between judicial procedural involvement (JPI) and lawsuits’ mode of disposition (MoD). Furthermore, we propose JPI as a metric for the allocation of judicial attention to litigants. Applying the framework to Israeli trial court data, we find that 60 per cent of cases included JPI (through hearings and rulings on motions) whereas 40 per cent involved only the court's institutional function. By juxtaposing JPI and MoD data, we shed light on the scope of judicial involvement in settlements, the ratio between judges’ normative public‐life function and their problem‐solving function, and other pertinent questions. Since nowadays lawsuits are rarely adjudicated, trial rates are low, and litigants in person (pro se litigants) are common, we argue that access to justice should also be construed in terms of access to judicial attention throughout the proceeding, which is readily measurable through JPI.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/jols.12243
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2434727779</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A633044811</galeid><sourcerecordid>A633044811</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3323-f0d75698e810e680d8d6f83a1c83ebd03c6e4985b903d2b23bbd9120d544263</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc9OGzEQxq2qSE0Dlz6BpUpVQWxqr51dL7coKiVRKhDpoTdr156NHJk12N7Q3HgNXq9PgsNyZi4zh983_z6EvlAyoSl-bJ0NE5rnnH1AI8qLMit4KT6iEckLlrGc_f2EPoewJYRQVooR2i97bZSpLb7xToHufSoX3c7ZHdxBF_H35c3i9ALP8G-I3ijcOo-TZgPh_9MzvnUWsOnw3OyMxSsTzaaOxnXneA0x2tcW57juNJ4pBSHg6JI6RKPgGB21tQ1w8pbHaH3588_8Kltd_1rMZ6tMsbRv1hJdTotKgKAECkG00EUrWE2VYNBowlQBvBLTpiJM503OmkZXNCd6ynm6eYy-Dl3vvXvoIUS5db3v0kCZnsTLvCzLKlHfBmpTW5CmU66L8C9u6j4EKWcFY4RzQWkCzwZQeReCh1bee3NX-72kRB4ckAcH5KsDCaYD_Ggs7N8h5fJ6tR40L6qvh9Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2434727779</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Judicial Procedural Involvement (JPI): A Metric for Judges’ Role in Civil Litigation, Settlement, and Access to Justice</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Sela, Ayelet ; Gabay‐Egozi, Limor</creator><creatorcontrib>Sela, Ayelet ; Gabay‐Egozi, Limor</creatorcontrib><description>We examine judges’ role in civil litigation by studying empirically the relationship between judicial procedural involvement (JPI) and lawsuits’ mode of disposition (MoD). Furthermore, we propose JPI as a metric for the allocation of judicial attention to litigants. Applying the framework to Israeli trial court data, we find that 60 per cent of cases included JPI (through hearings and rulings on motions) whereas 40 per cent involved only the court's institutional function. By juxtaposing JPI and MoD data, we shed light on the scope of judicial involvement in settlements, the ratio between judges’ normative public‐life function and their problem‐solving function, and other pertinent questions. Since nowadays lawsuits are rarely adjudicated, trial rates are low, and litigants in person (pro se litigants) are common, we argue that access to justice should also be construed in terms of access to judicial attention throughout the proceeding, which is readily measurable through JPI.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0263-323X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1467-6478</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/jols.12243</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Access ; Actions and defenses ; Attention ; Courts ; Criminal sentences ; Judges &amp; magistrates ; Justice ; Litigation ; Participation ; Procedural justice ; Trials</subject><ispartof>Journal of law and society, 2020-09, Vol.47 (3), p.468-498</ispartof><rights>2020 The Author. Journal of Law and Society © 2020 Cardiff University Law School</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2020 Blackwell Publishers Ltd.</rights><rights>2020 Cardiff University Law School</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3323-f0d75698e810e680d8d6f83a1c83ebd03c6e4985b903d2b23bbd9120d544263</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fjols.12243$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fjols.12243$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1416,27923,27924,33773,45573,45574</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sela, Ayelet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gabay‐Egozi, Limor</creatorcontrib><title>Judicial Procedural Involvement (JPI): A Metric for Judges’ Role in Civil Litigation, Settlement, and Access to Justice</title><title>Journal of law and society</title><description>We examine judges’ role in civil litigation by studying empirically the relationship between judicial procedural involvement (JPI) and lawsuits’ mode of disposition (MoD). Furthermore, we propose JPI as a metric for the allocation of judicial attention to litigants. Applying the framework to Israeli trial court data, we find that 60 per cent of cases included JPI (through hearings and rulings on motions) whereas 40 per cent involved only the court's institutional function. By juxtaposing JPI and MoD data, we shed light on the scope of judicial involvement in settlements, the ratio between judges’ normative public‐life function and their problem‐solving function, and other pertinent questions. Since nowadays lawsuits are rarely adjudicated, trial rates are low, and litigants in person (pro se litigants) are common, we argue that access to justice should also be construed in terms of access to judicial attention throughout the proceeding, which is readily measurable through JPI.</description><subject>Access</subject><subject>Actions and defenses</subject><subject>Attention</subject><subject>Courts</subject><subject>Criminal sentences</subject><subject>Judges &amp; magistrates</subject><subject>Justice</subject><subject>Litigation</subject><subject>Participation</subject><subject>Procedural justice</subject><subject>Trials</subject><issn>0263-323X</issn><issn>1467-6478</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc9OGzEQxq2qSE0Dlz6BpUpVQWxqr51dL7coKiVRKhDpoTdr156NHJk12N7Q3HgNXq9PgsNyZi4zh983_z6EvlAyoSl-bJ0NE5rnnH1AI8qLMit4KT6iEckLlrGc_f2EPoewJYRQVooR2i97bZSpLb7xToHufSoX3c7ZHdxBF_H35c3i9ALP8G-I3ijcOo-TZgPh_9MzvnUWsOnw3OyMxSsTzaaOxnXneA0x2tcW57juNJ4pBSHg6JI6RKPgGB21tQ1w8pbHaH3588_8Kltd_1rMZ6tMsbRv1hJdTotKgKAECkG00EUrWE2VYNBowlQBvBLTpiJM503OmkZXNCd6ynm6eYy-Dl3vvXvoIUS5db3v0kCZnsTLvCzLKlHfBmpTW5CmU66L8C9u6j4EKWcFY4RzQWkCzwZQeReCh1bee3NX-72kRB4ckAcH5KsDCaYD_Ggs7N8h5fJ6tR40L6qvh9Q</recordid><startdate>202009</startdate><enddate>202009</enddate><creator>Sela, Ayelet</creator><creator>Gabay‐Egozi, Limor</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202009</creationdate><title>Judicial Procedural Involvement (JPI): A Metric for Judges’ Role in Civil Litigation, Settlement, and Access to Justice</title><author>Sela, Ayelet ; Gabay‐Egozi, Limor</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3323-f0d75698e810e680d8d6f83a1c83ebd03c6e4985b903d2b23bbd9120d544263</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Access</topic><topic>Actions and defenses</topic><topic>Attention</topic><topic>Courts</topic><topic>Criminal sentences</topic><topic>Judges &amp; magistrates</topic><topic>Justice</topic><topic>Litigation</topic><topic>Participation</topic><topic>Procedural justice</topic><topic>Trials</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sela, Ayelet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gabay‐Egozi, Limor</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Journal of law and society</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sela, Ayelet</au><au>Gabay‐Egozi, Limor</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Judicial Procedural Involvement (JPI): A Metric for Judges’ Role in Civil Litigation, Settlement, and Access to Justice</atitle><jtitle>Journal of law and society</jtitle><date>2020-09</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>47</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>468</spage><epage>498</epage><pages>468-498</pages><issn>0263-323X</issn><eissn>1467-6478</eissn><abstract>We examine judges’ role in civil litigation by studying empirically the relationship between judicial procedural involvement (JPI) and lawsuits’ mode of disposition (MoD). Furthermore, we propose JPI as a metric for the allocation of judicial attention to litigants. Applying the framework to Israeli trial court data, we find that 60 per cent of cases included JPI (through hearings and rulings on motions) whereas 40 per cent involved only the court's institutional function. By juxtaposing JPI and MoD data, we shed light on the scope of judicial involvement in settlements, the ratio between judges’ normative public‐life function and their problem‐solving function, and other pertinent questions. Since nowadays lawsuits are rarely adjudicated, trial rates are low, and litigants in person (pro se litigants) are common, we argue that access to justice should also be construed in terms of access to judicial attention throughout the proceeding, which is readily measurable through JPI.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/jols.12243</doi><tpages>31</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0263-323X
ispartof Journal of law and society, 2020-09, Vol.47 (3), p.468-498
issn 0263-323X
1467-6478
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2434727779
source Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; Sociological Abstracts; Wiley Online Library All Journals
subjects Access
Actions and defenses
Attention
Courts
Criminal sentences
Judges & magistrates
Justice
Litigation
Participation
Procedural justice
Trials
title Judicial Procedural Involvement (JPI): A Metric for Judges’ Role in Civil Litigation, Settlement, and Access to Justice
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T21%3A11%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Judicial%20Procedural%20Involvement%20(JPI):%20A%20Metric%20for%20Judges%E2%80%99%20Role%20in%20Civil%20Litigation,%20Settlement,%20and%20Access%20to%20Justice&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20law%20and%20society&rft.au=Sela,%20Ayelet&rft.date=2020-09&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=468&rft.epage=498&rft.pages=468-498&rft.issn=0263-323X&rft.eissn=1467-6478&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/jols.12243&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA633044811%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2434727779&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A633044811&rfr_iscdi=true