Appellate courts vary in how much discretion they exercise over which cases to hear.
Evidence
Appellate courts differ among themselves in terms of: … 1. Agenda setting. To what extent do legal guidelines determine what cases a court must decide, and to what extent does the court exercise discretion in deciding what cases to hear? — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1462
Categorization
- DEFINE: Introduces agenda setting as a dimension on which appellate courts can be compared.
- XREF: connects to: Litigant demand, not judicial discretion, determines district court dockets — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 275; Automatic appellate rights make appeals courts primarily error-correcting bodies. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 288; Geographic jurisdiction shapes which case types each circuit hears. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 290 (+8 more)
Broader Connections
- First-level appellate courts must hear all appeals brought before them
#contradicts(1.00) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1585 - Lower appellate courts decide most appeals on briefs rather than oral argument
#expands(0.85) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1596 - Ambiguous rulings expand lower-court discretion, which can blunt the ruling’s intended effect.
#expands(0.85) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1642 - Fragmented Supreme Court majorities complicate lower courts’ interpretation of rulings
#expands(0.85) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1570 - Appellate courts inconsistently apply procedural waiver rules to different parties
#expands(0.85) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1011 - Discretion differs by whether the actor must relate reasons across decisions.
#expands(0.85) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 2748 - Even good-faith judges reach different rulings because judgment involves discretion
#expands(0.85) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 369