Content area
Abstract
The present study tested several assumptions underlying the trend toward use of prehearing procedures at the appellate level to settle or improve litigation. Two hundred and ninety eight civil appeals to a state supreme court were randomly assigned either to participate in the state's Prehearing Conference Program (PCP) or to bypass that procedure. Cases assigned to participate in the PCP were randomly assigned to one of two presiding Conference Officers. Case settlement rates, case processing times and the amounts of attorney time and client funds spent in pressing the appeals were compared for the three groups of cases. Additionally, the relationship between these dependent measures and control, case and participant variables were investigated. Control variables included process and decision control. Case variables consisted of attorney ratings of case type and case complexity. Finally, participant variables involved the comparison of levels of actual and perceived advantage in the litigation and the assessment of attorney attitudes concerning both formal PCP participation and informal contacts between opposing counsel to discuss settlement.
The case settlement rates and mean case processing times of the three groups of cases did not differ significantly from one another. Similarly, attorney time and client costs were statistically equivalent across groups. Significant differences were found in the manner in which the individual Conference Officers distributed process and decision control among participants during conferences in which they presided. Attorneys reported greater satisfaction with the manner in which the less controlling Officer conducted his conferences, although greater attorney satisfaction did not result in the resolution of a higher number of cases through settlement. Attorney ratings of the complexity of the issues involved in their cases was significantly related to case disposition; simpler cases were more likely to result in settlement and more complex cases were most often submitted to and decided by the Court. Finally, the attorneys reported a strong preference in favor of PCP participation, but tended to oppose the Court rule that requires participation in all civil cases.
