State Supreme Courts Caseload Report, 2013
The law in the United States has two derivations: case law and statute. Statutes are passed by legislatures and are codified law. Case law, however, is judge-made law and results from a judge or panel of justices deciding a case. The justices may be interpreting statutes or actually creating new rules for situations that have not yet been addressed by the legislatures. Sometimes justices are making subtle changes in existing case law because a new scenario has arisen and the current rule needs to be tweaked to fit that scenario.
Every year, millions of cases are filed in U.S. courts. A portion proceed down the avenue of legal procedure to the court of last resort. For most of these special cases, that court of last resort is the state supreme court. The highest court is crucial, for the state's highest court is often called upon to be the final word in case law, interpretation of statutes, and the constitutionality of the legislative laws.
So how do the 50 highest state courts handle their enormous caseloads? Which states are best at getting cases in and out expediently? Which states are worst? Why it even matter?
This report will look at caseload data for 37 states. This is not an arbitrary number; unfortunately, only 37 states have provided this information. Further, this report will view the numbers from several angles. First, we will look at which states have the best overall record from 2007 through 2011. Next, we will look at each of those years independently to determine which states performed the best on a year-by-year basis. Finally, we will look at the worst-performing courts for the period spanning 2007 through 2011.
2007-2011 Retrospective
Best of 2007 – 2011: Dispositions to Filings
| Court | Filings | Dispositions | Dispositions to Filings |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kansas Supreme Court | 9,506 | 14,031 | 1.48 |
| Montana Supreme Court | 2,947 | 3,718 | 1.26 |
| Tennessee Supreme Court | 1,132 | 1,374 | 1.21 |
| Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia | 11,694 | 13,683 | 1.17 |
| Connecticut Supreme Court | 996 | 1,103 | 1.11 |
This table shows the top five overall states when comparing the total number of filings with the court to dispositions, or resolutions, to each filing. According to this measure, the Kansas Supreme Court was the most efficient high court in the nation for the 2007 – 2011 period.
Best of 2007 – 2011: Dispositions per judge
| Court | Filings | Dispositions | Number of justices | Dispositions per Judge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| California Supreme Court | 48,490 | 48,702 | 7 | 6,957 |
| Texas Supreme Court and Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (combined) | 59,200 | 53,928 | 18 | 2,996 |
| Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia | 11,694 | 13,683 | 5 | 2,737 |
| Illinois Supreme Court | 14,440 | 14,710 | 7 | 2,101 |
| Kansas Supreme Court | 9,506 | 14,031 | 7 | 2,004 |
The California Supreme Court came out on top with the most dispositions per judge for the 2007 through 2011 period. We see Kansas and West Virginia again in this ranking, but not in the same order. West Virginia, which has only five supreme court justices, averaged 2,737 resolutions per judge over the time period. Kansas, which has seven justices, averaged 2,004 over the same period. Each West Virginia Supreme Court judge was a bit busier than his or her counterpart on the Kansas Supreme Court.
Texas deserves its own paragraph of recognition and proves that the saying is true: Everything is bigger in Texas. The state has two high courts, the Texas Supreme Court and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. The Court of Criminal Appeals is the last resort for all criminal cases, while the buck stops at the Texas Supreme Court for civil appeals. When combined, these two courts handled more than 50,000 cases in a five-year period. With 18 justices, the two courts handled on average 2,996 resolutions per judge.
Overall
Best of 2007 – 2011: Overall Filings
|
Best of 2007 – 2011: Overall Dispositions
|
Comparing the total number of filings to dispositions for the five-year period, Texas and California are in the top two spots, respectively, for each. Maybe that is not a surprise. One reason for this could be the fact the states are numbers one and two on the list of overall state population.[1] However, population is not the only factor in the number of cases to come before a high court. New York, the third most populous state in the nation, is not on the top-five list for either filings or dispositions. In fact, the New York Court of Appeals does not make its appearance until spot 13.
2007-2011: What did it cost?
As the old saying goes, two things are certain in life: death and taxes. Citizens are rightly interested in how state governments spend their tax dollars. The judiciary is one area where such money is spent.
In recent years, state governments have cut judiciary budgets, leading to layoffs and delays in case resolution at every level of the judiciary. Hawaii issued a “Justice in Jeopardy” report in 2011. In it, Chief Justice Mark Recktenwald of the Hawaiian Supreme Court discusses the ramifications of cuts to the judiciary budget. Recktenwald stated that the cuts and state-mandated furloughs of government employees “have had substantial negative effects throughout the judicial system, by reducing, delaying and in some cases eliminating important services. Notably, Hawaii’s families and most vulnerable citizens have been significantly impacted.”[2]
There does not appear to be any rhyme or reason to judicial salaries. The spread between the highest-paid and lowest-paid state supreme court over the period spanning 2007 through 2011 is staggering. Texas, the highest, paid its two courts of last resort a whopping total of $27,000,000 for its eighteen judges, while South Dakota, the lowest, paid its five supreme court justices a total of just $2,954,325.[3] The average per judge would be $1,500,000 for Texas and $590,865 for South Dakota.
Perhaps the most interesting total to review is what it cost taxpayers per judge per resolution of a case. For example, the State of Tennessee pays its five justices $165,336 per year.[3] Over the five-year period, the state paid its justices a total of $4,133,400. Given that the Tennessee Supreme Court disposed of a total of 1,374 cases, each justice was paid $3,008.30 per case.
| Court | Annual Salary[3] | Five-year Salary Total | Number of justices | Combined Five-year Salary Total | Dispositions | Cost per disposition |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Missouri Supreme Court | $147,591 | $737,955 | 7 | $5,165,685 | 354 | $14,592.33 |
| Minnesota Supreme Court | $145,981 | $729,905 | 7 | $5,109,335 | 588 | $8,689.35 |
| Maryland Court of Appeals | $165,600 | $828,000 | 7 | $5,796,000 | 710 | $8,163.38 |
| Connecticut Supreme Court | $162,520 | $812,600 | 7 | $5,688,200 | 1,103 | $5,157.03 |
| Arkansas Supreme Court | $145,204 | $726,020 | 7 | $5,082,140 | 1,535 | $3,310.84 |
Over the five-year period, Missouri paid each justice more per disposition than any other state. The state paid just over $14,500 for its 354 dispositions. The next closest state, Minnesota, paid nearly $6,000 less for its 588 dispositions. From this perspective, it seems that Minnesota justices did a third more work for less pay than their Missouri counterparts.
| Court | Annual Salary[3] | Five-year Salary Total | Number of justices | Combined Five-year Salary Total | Dispositions | Cost per disposition |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California Supreme Court | $218,237 | $1,091,185 | 7 | $7,638,295 | 48,702 | $156.84 |
| Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia | $136,000 | $680,000 | 5 | $3,400,000 | 13,683 | $248.48 |
| Texas Supreme Court and Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (combined) | $150,000 | $1,500,000 | 18 | $27,000,000 | 53,928 | $500.67 |
| Kansas Supreme Court | $135,905 | $679,525 | 7 | $4,756,675 | 14,031 | $339.01 |
| Louisiana Supreme Court | $150,772 | $753,860 | 7 | $5,277,020 | 13,849 | $381.04 |
*States often pay the chief justice a higher salary than associate justices. In an effort to keep the numbers simple, however, the associate justice salary was used to complete the salary tables.
The nation's most populous state, California, paid its justices less per disposition than any other state supreme court. In comparison, the second most populous state, Texas, handled roughly 5,000 more dispositions and paid their justices $350 more per disposition. California has faced well-publicized budget woes in the past decade. Cuts to the state budget resulting from deficits have negatively impacted the state's entire court system.[4] California's Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye is concerned about the effect of budget cuts on citizen access to the courts. She explained, "In Sacramento, we know of a situation where a father sought custody of his son during a time when the mother was trying to take the son out of state. The father went to the Sacramento court, but due to delays, employee layoffs, reduced services - all due to budget cuts - that father was unable to file his papers and his son left the state, fate unknown."[5]
It is not surprising to see West Virginia on this list since the state is one of the poorest in the nation. In 2012, 17.5 percent of its citizens lived below the poverty line.[6]
| Rank | Court | Annual Salary[3] | Five-year Salary Total | Number of justices | Combined Five-year Salary Total | Dispositions | Cost per disposition |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | California Supreme Court | $218,237 | $1,091,185 | 7 | $7,638,295 | 48,702 | $156.84 |
| 2 | Texas Supreme Court and Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (combined) | $150,000 | $1,500,000 | 18 | $27,000,000 | 53,928 | $500.67 |
| 3 | State of New York Court of Appeals | $177,000 | $885,000 | 7 | $6,195,000 | 8,108 | $764.06 |
| 5 | Illinois Supreme Court | $211,228 | $1,056,140 | 7 | $7,392,980 | 14,710 | $502.58 |
| 7 | Ohio Supreme Court | $141,600 | $708,000 | 7 | $4,956,000 | 11,921 | $415.74 |
| 8 | Georgia Supreme Court | $167,210 | $836,050 | 7 | $5,852,350 | 10,062 | $581.63 |
| 9 | Michigan Supreme Court | $164,610 | $823,050 | 7 | $5,761,350 | 11,317 | $509.09 |
| 10 | Supreme Court of North Carolina | $138,896 | $694,480 | 7 | $4,861,360 | 3,739 | $1,300.18 |
*Disposition data for Florida (4) and Pennsylvania (6) is unavailable.
Year-to-Year Look: Dispositions to Filings
Which courts handled the most cases year after year? Which were consistently at the bottom of the list? By looking at the number of cases disposed of compared to the number of cases taken in, we see the efficiency or inefficiency of the court.
Access to justice is always a hot topic. The previous section mentioned shrinking court budgets. As the current economic fallout continues, will we see it reflected in the amount of cases state courts are able to handle? Will the bottleneck at the trial court level stifle appellate review of cases? Further, will legal issues be stymied before reaching the supreme court level because of economic worries? Case law – the judge-made law of the state – would be impacted if that happened. Only time will tell.
In the meantime, the following tables provide the top and bottom five courts per year when comparing dispositions to filings for the years spanning 2007 to 2011, starting with the most recent.
| Best | Worst | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Kansas Supreme Court appeared in the top five each year. In 2011, it handled nearly twice as many cases as it received. The Arkansas Supreme Court and the Idaho Supreme Court, however, both appeared twice on the "Worst of" lists. Aside from these observations, there were no detectable patterns in these results.
Yearly Dispositions Per Judge
The California Supreme Court and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals came in at numbers one and two respectively for the highest total of dispositions per judge for each year from 2007 through 2011. One explanation is that, in spite of California's budget woes, both it and Texas have large populations and subsequent heavy caseloads. Could there be another explanation for the fact the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals stays busy?
Given the serious nature of the death penalty, if a person is sentenced to death in Texas, he or she is entitled to a direct appeal to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, thereby bypassing the intermediate appellate court in the state.[7] From 2007 through 2011, the state executed a total of 98 people.[8] Given that most people sentenced to death pursue all possible avenues of redress, and death penalty appeals are mandatorily handled by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, these appeals theoretically comprise a substantial portion of that court's yearly docket. However, in 2011, only 7 percent of its caseload was death penalty related.[9]
So, if the caseload is not growing from death penalty cases, where does it come from? The answer to that question lies in Texas statute, which mandates that certain types of cases must be heard by the Court of Criminal Appeals. In fact, in 2011, 75 percent of the Court of Criminal Appeals docket was made up of cases it was required to hear.[9] While the court retains some discretionary authority to choose its own docket, it seems that Texas law has created most of the court's caseload.
The Missouri Supreme Court had the least amount of dispositions per judge of any state in the years 2007 through 2011. That court came in dead last year after year. This is significant given the fact that, over the course of those five years, the state paid its seven justices the most per disposition ($13,548.56).
The following tables show the number of dispositions per judge for each year from 2007 through 2011, starting with the most recent.
| Court | Dispositions | Seats | Dispositions per judge |
|---|---|---|---|
| California Supreme Court | 10,063 | 7 | 1,437.57 |
| Texas Court of Criminal Appeals | 8,720 | 9 | 968.89 |
| Illinois Supreme Court | 3,104 | 7 | 443.43 |
| Louisiana Supreme Court | 2,916 | 7 | 416.57 |
| Kansas Supreme Court | 2,577 | 7 | 368.14 |
| Court | Dispositions | Seats | Dispositions per judge |
|---|---|---|---|
| California Supreme Court | 9,439 | 7 | 1,348.43 |
| Texas Court of Criminal Appeals | 8,257 | 9 | 917.44 |
| Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia | 2,782 | 5 | 556.40 |
| Illinois Supreme Court | 2,922 | 7 | 417.43 |
| Louisiana Supreme Court | 2,801 | 7 | 400.14 |
| Court | Dispositions | Seats | Dispositions per judge |
|---|---|---|---|
| California Supreme Court | 9,513 | 7 | 1,359.00 |
| Texas Court of Criminal Appeals | 9,703 | 9 | 1,078.11 |
| Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia | 3,589 | 5 | 717.80 |
| Kansas Supreme Court | 2,972 | 7 | 424.57 |
| Illinois Supreme Court | 2,987 | 7 | 413.86 |
| Court | Dispositions | Seats | Dispositions per judge |
|---|---|---|---|
| California Supreme Court | 10,440 | 7 | 1,491.43 |
| Texas Court of Criminal Appeals | 9,879 | 9 | 1,097.67 |
| Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia | 4,102 | 5 | 820.40 |
| Louisiana Supreme Court | 2,834 | 7 | 404.86 |
| Illinois Supreme Court | 2,825 | 7 | 403.57 |
| Court | Dispositions | Seats | Dispositions per judge |
|---|---|---|---|
| California Supreme Court | 9,247 | 7 | 1,321.00 |
| Texas Court of Criminal Appeals | 10,929 | 9 | 1,214.33 |
| Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia | 2,532 | 5 | 506.40 |
| Kansas Supreme Court | 3,005 | 7 | 429.29 |
| Illinois Supreme Court | 2,962 | 7 | 423.14 |
Worst-Performing Courts: 2007-2011
Which courts performed the worst overall? The following table contains the five worst-performing courts, based on the number of cases disposed per judge, for the period 2007 through 2011.
| Court | Filings | Dispositions | Seats | Dispositions per judge | Dispositions to Filings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama Supreme Court | 22,917 | 9,020 | 9 | 1,002 | 0.39 |
| Idaho Supreme Court | 2,371 | 1,457 | 9 | 291 | 0.61 |
| Texas Supreme Court and Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (combined) | 59,200 | 53,928 | 18 | 2,996 | 0.91 |
| Maryland Court of Appeals | 770 | 710 | 7 | 101 | 0.92 |
| State of New York Court of Appeals | 8,761 | 8,108 | 7 | 1,158 | 0.93 |
Based on this measure, Alabama had the worst-performing court during the five-year span of 2007 through 2011. The court, which has nine justices, took in more than 22,000 cases and disposed of fewer than half of them. Earlier in the report, we discussed how much each disposition cost state taxpayers. Alabama taxpayers paid $5,277.02 for each of the cases the court handled. In fact, Alabama came in at number four on our list of most expensive case dispositions.
Interestingly, Texas comes in at number three on this list of worst-performing courts. However, taxpayers in that state may be happy to learn that they only pay each justice $500.67 per case. The combined courts of last resort in Texas actually placed eighth on our list of least cost per disposition. (Our tables showed only the top and bottom five state courts.)
Final thoughts
This report is an attempt to educate our readers about the caseload of state supreme courts. Judgepedia is owned and operated by the Lucy Burns Institute, whose core mission is to “make the most knowledge available to the greatest number of people in the hopes that, armed with this information, citizens will become more engaged in the political process."[10] It is our desire that this report creates dialogue among citizens about the work of the judiciary and how it affects them individually and as citizens of their state.
If you have questions about this report, please e-mail: editor@ballotpedia.org.
See also
Footnotes
- ↑ List of U.S. states by population
- ↑ Hawaii State Judiciary, “Justice in Jeopardy: Furloughs and Budget Cuts Negatively Impacting State Court System“
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 National Center for State Courts, "Survey of Judicial Salaries," January 1, 2013
- ↑ AFSCME, “California Budget Cuts Leave Court System Decimated”, May 23, 2013
- ↑ Times Herald, "California chief justice, attorneys seek more court funding," April 17, 2012
- ↑ U.S. Census Bureau, “West Virginia QuickFacts”
- ↑ Wikipedia, “Capital Punishment in Texas”
- ↑ Texas Execution Information Center, “Statistics”
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 Ken Collier, Steven Galatas, Julie Harrelson-Stephens, "Lone Star Politics: Tradition and Transformation in Texas," pg. 207
- ↑ Lucy Burns Institute, “Why do you do what you do?”
