1
EXAMINING THE WORK OF
THE STATE COURTS
VOLUME 14, NUMBER 2
JULY 2007
Civil Trials on Appeal - Part 2
•
What type of trial errors are
associated with appellate
reversal rates?
National Center for State Courts • Richard Y. Schauffler, Project Director • Nicole L. Waters & Tracy Sohni, Authors
See Figure 2
CASELOAD
HIGHLIGHTS
Appellate Courts Address Alleged Error
Why do civil litigants appeal? How often
do litigants appeal to the state’s highest ap-
pellate court? Part II of this two-part Case-
load Highlights series explores appeals by
litigants in civil jury and bench trials to 33
intermediate appellate courts and 13 courts
of last resort across the nation.
The data reported in this issue are from
the Civil Justice Survey of State Courts,
2001 - Supplemental Study of Civil Ap-
peals, conducted by the National Center
for State Courts (NCSC) with funding
from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)
(See also BJS Report on Civil Appeals).
This study examined 1,204 appeals from
civil bench and jury trials in 46 large, ur-
ban courts. Part I of this series highlight-
ed activity in intermediate appellate courts
(IAC). Part II further explores IAC ap-
peals by examining alleged trial court er-
rors raised on appeal and also includes an
analysis of discretionary appellate review
by the courts of last resort (COLR).
As discussed in Part I of this series, the
highest state appellate court is referred to
as the court of last resort (COLR). With
the exception of Virginia, participating
states have a two-tiered appellate court
structure for civil cases. In these states,
the IAC has mandatory jurisdiction, or
must hear the appeal, assuming the ap-
peal is filed properly (e.g., no procedural
errors, appropriate jurisdiction). The
COLR has discretionary jurisdiction and
may deny an appellant’s petition to con-
sider an appeal.
Appellants (parties initiating the appeal)
allege that the trial court erred through
written legal briefs to the IAC. Appellees
respond to these