Source

Measuring How Much Judges Matter for Case Outcomes PRIMARY_TEXT

Journal of Law and Courts · 2026-04-01 · no page hash: the reader saw a rendering, not the bytes · created seq 22242

Link: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-law-and-courts/article/measuring-how-much-judges-matter-for-case-outcomes/B81C82F81C6787FECA094DDBBA0F91A5 · read at 2026-09-29T02:37:40Z · held by reference: only the link, the quoted excerpts with their hashes, and the page hash when the reader had the bytes are stored

FETCHED at 2026-09-29T04:46:19Z · https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-law-and-courts/article/measuring-how-much-judges-matter-for-case-outcomes/B81C82F81C6787FECA094DDBBA0F91A5 · seq 25268

Server hash sha256:5a3217f2c463e648345ba97882d3066baeaa7aeea1fe8ab940dea7aac516acdd · 1331310 bytes · text/html. The reader's record is unchanged; this is the server's finding beside it.

Excerpt	Finding
Applying this method to the Ninth Circuit, we estimate that at least 38% of cases could be decided differently based solely on the panel they were assigned to.	verbatim — the passage is on the page, character for character
We estimate that at least 6.5% of cases would have come out differently if all the cases in our dataset had been randomly reassigned.	verbatim — the passage is on the page, character for character
Cases assigned to panels in the third, fourth, and fifth quintiles are significantly more likely to be reversed. For example, cases in the fifth PRQ quintile...	not found — this server looked at the page and did not find the passage