The Supreme Court's Certiorari Decisions: Conflict as a Predictive Variable

American Political Science Review

Volumn 78, Issue 4, 1984, Pages 901-911

  Ulmer, S Sidney ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84974054568     PISSN: 00030554     EISSN: 15375943     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/1955797     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. American Bar Association Journal, 1983, 69, 424.
2. Brennan W.J. Remarks at the third circuit judicial conference. 1982.
3. Brenner S. The new certiorari game. Journal of Politics, 1979, 41, 649-655.
4. Clark v. U.S. 381 F. 2d 230, CA 10 (1960).
5. Feeney F. Conflicts involving federal law: A review of cases presented to the Supreme Court. Structure and internal procedures: Recommendations for change. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1975, pp. 93-94.
6. Frankfurter F., & Landis J.M. The business of the Supreme Court. New York: Macmillan, 1927.
7. Kirkpatrick S.A. Quantitative analysis of political data. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1974.
8. Kort F. Regression analysis and discriminant analysis: An application of R.A. Fisher's theorem to data in political science. American Political Science Review, 1973, 67, 555-559.
9. Lanrao Inc. v. U.S. 422 F. 2d 481, CA 6 (1970).
10. Martin v. Hunter's Lessee 1 Wheat. 304, 1816.
11. Provine D.M. Case selection in the U.S. Supreme Court. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.
12. Richardson J.D. Messages and papers of the presidents. New York: Bureau of National Literature, 1916.
13. Songer D.R. Concern for policy outputs as a cue for Supreme Court decisions on certiorari. Journal of Politics, 1979, 47, 1185-1194.
14. Stern R.L., & Gressman E. Supreme Court practice (5th ed.). Washington, D.C.: Bureau of National Affairs, 1978.
15. Stevens J.P. Some thoughts on judicial restraint. Judicature, 1982, 66, 177-183.
16. Taft W.H. The attacks on the courts and legal procedures. Kentucky Law Journal, 1916, 5, 3-24.
17. Taft W.H. Hearings before the committee on the judiciary. HR, 67th Congress, 2nd Session, 1922, p. 2.
18. Taft W.H. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under the act of February 13, 1972. Yale Law Journal, 1925, 35, 1, 2-3.
19. Talarico S.M. An application of discriminant analysis in criminal justice research. Jurimetrics Journal, 1977, 18, 18, 46.
20. Tanenhaus J., Schick M., Muraskin M., & Rosen D. The Supreme Court's certiorari jurisdiction: Cue theory. In Ulmer S.S. (Ed.). Courts, law and judicial processes. New York: Free Press, 1981, pp. 273-283.
21. Teger S.H., & Kosinski D. The cue theory of Supreme Court certiorari jurisdiction: A reconsideration. Journal of Politics, 1980, 42, 834-846.
22. Ulmer S.S. Conflict with Supreme Court precedents and the granting of plenary review. Journal of Politics, 1983, 45, 474-478.
23. Ulmer S.S. Courts, law and judicial processes. New York: Free Press, 1981, pp. 284-298.
24. Ulmer S.S. Dimensionality and change in judicial behavior. In Herndon J.H. & Bernd J. (Eds.). Mathematical applications in political science VII. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1974, pp. 40-67.
25. Ulmer S.S. The discriminant function and a theoretical context for its use in estimating the votes of judges. In Grossman J. & Tanenhaus J. (Eds.). Frontiers of judicial research. New York: Wiley, 1969, pp. 335-369.
26. Ulmer S.S. Mathematical models for predicting judicial behavior. In Bernd J.L. (Ed.). Mathematical applications in political science II. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1967, pp. 67-95.
27. U.S. v. Mountain States Mixed Feed Co. 365 F. 2d. 244, CA 10 (1966).
28. U.S. v. Patillo 438 F. 2d 13, CA 4 (1971).
29. U.S. v. Faleafine 492 F. 2d 18, CA 9 (1974).
30. U.S. Law Week. 1980, 48: 4344.
31. Wasby S.L. Continuity and change from the Warren to the Burger court. Pacific Palisades, Calif.: Goodyear, 1976.
32. Watts v. U.S. 402 F. 2d 676, D.C. Cir. (1969).
33. White B. Remarks before the American Bar Association annual meeting, August 1982.