Content area
Abstract
I explore what influences individuals in their decision to appeal from final trial court judgments in civil cases. Utilizing qualitative interviews with one hundred and four losing litigants in Cook County, Illinois and the State of Minnesota, I demonstrate that the existing models of the decision to appeal are flawed. These models are outcome-driven. I propose that an alternative approach, which focuses upon losing litigants' perceptions of the trial court and expectations of the appellate court in terms of procedures and outcome, appears to more effectively capture the ideas articulated by the losing litigants. The alternative approach is based upon the existing procedural justice literature. Finally, I propose that the procedural justice approach is important because it acknowledges the appellant as a political actor appealing to a political institution. The appellant is challenging the articulated policy of the government. The new approach argues that one of the goals of the appellant is to have the opportunity to have her alternative policy heard by a policymaking institution. The dissertation concludes by demonstrating that the new approach appears in keeping with the role of the appellate courts as political institutions.
