Designing with theories: Producing legal design diffractively in courts of justice

Access to Justice for Discrimination Complainants: Courts and Legal Representation

In the terms of Marc Galanter’s classic article, ‘Why the “Haves” Come Out Ahead’,1 people making complaints of discrimination are typically ‘one shotters’ who have little or no prior contact with the legal system and who are deeply invested – both emotionally and financially – in the outcome of their case. They tend to have limited financial resources, may be members of ethnic minorities with ...

Legal Uniformity in American Courts

Intercircuit splits occur when two or more circuits on the U.S. Courts of Appeals issue different legal rules about the same legal question. When this happens, federal law is applied differently in different parts of the country. Intercircuit splits are an indicator of legal non-uniformity, an impediment to lawyering and judging, and have real, practical consequences for American law. They are ...

Improving Access to Justice in State Courts with Platform Technology

Legal Doctrine on Collegial Courts

Appellate courts, which have the most control over legal doctrine, tend to operate through collegial (multimember) decision making. How does this collegiality affect their choice of legal doctrine? Can decisions by appellate courts be expected to result in a meaningful collegial rule? How do such collegial rules differ from the rules of individual judges? We explore these questions and show tha...

Cyber Courts and the Future of Justice

real need exists to use the benefits of modern technology intelligently to reduce the court backlogs. Cyber courts are a viable alternative to the endless delays that plague court dockets, but only if they succeed in making courts more efficient. This column deals with the Michigan Cyber Court, one state’s effort to streamline the judicial process through the intelligent use of new technology. ...