U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Tort Trials and Verdicts in Large Counties, 1996 August 2000, NCJ 179769 ---------------------------------------------------------------- This file is text only without graphics and many of the tables. A Zip archive of the tables in this report in spreadsheet format (.wk1) and the full report including tables and graphics in .pdf format are available from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/ttvlc96.htm This report is one in a series. More recent editions may be available. To view a list of all in the series go to http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pubalp2.htm#ttvlc ----------------------------------------------------------------- By Marika F. X. Litras Sidra Lea Gifford Carol J. DeFrances BJS Statisticians David B. Rottman Neil LaFountain Brian J. Ostrom National Center for State Courts ----------------------------------------------------------------- Highlights * During 1996 an estimated 10,278 tort cases were decided by a trial in the Nation's 75 largest counties. A jury decided about 85% of these tort trial cases, including nearly all (93%) of the medical malpractice trials. * Forty-two percent of tort trials involved a private individual suing another individual. About 39% of tort claims involved an individual suing a business. * Plaintiffs won in 48% of tort trial cases. Plaintiffs were more likely to win in tort trials decided by a judge (57%) than a jury (48%). Plaintiffs won in 58% of automobile accident trials, 57% of intentional tort trials, and 23% of medical malpractice trials. * The median final award to plaintiff winners in tort trials during 1996 was about $31,000. Seventeen percent of final awards exceeded $250,000 and 6% were $1 million or more. * About 3% of plaintiff winners in tort trials were awarded punitive damages. The median punitive damage award was $38,000. Twenty-four percent of plaintiff winners were awarded punitive damages when defendants acted with general or specific intent (intentional tort). * The median case processing time or tort cases from filing to the verdict or final judgment was 22 months for jury trials and 19 months for bench trials. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Tort claims comprised over 65% of the estimated 15,000 tort, contract, and real property rights cases decided by a trial in the Nation's 75 largest counties in 1996. In tort cases plaintiffs allege injury, loss, or damage from negligent or intentional acts of defendants. About 85% of the estimated 10,278 tort trials during 1996 were decided by a jury. This Bulletin focuses on trials because the availability of compensation data is generally limited to cases decided by trial. When civil cases are settled, compensation amounts are routinely not reported to the court. Award information, particularly jury awards, have been a central focus of tort reform.***Footnote 1: B. Ostrom, D. Rottman, and J. Goerdt, "Step above Anecdote: A Profile of the Civil Jury in the 1990s," Judicature, 79(5), 1996, p. 233; Erik Moller, Trends in Civil Jury Verdicts since 1985, RAND, MR-694-ICJ, 1996.*** This is the third in a series of reports based on the Civil Justice Survey of State Courts, 1996, which collected sample data about tort, contract, and real property rights cases decided by a trial in State courts of general jurisdiction in the Nation's 75 largest counties.***Footnote 2: Civil Trial Cases and Verdicts in Large Counties, 1996 (NCJ 173426) and Contract Trials and Verdicts in Large Counties, 1996 (NCJ 179451). These BJS Bulletins are available on the internedt at http://www.ojp. usdoj.gov/bjs/civil.htm.*** The sample of civil trial cases excluded civil cases that were not tort, contract, or real property rights cases. Also excluded were Federal trials, trials in counties outside the 75 largest, and trials in State courts of limited jurisdiction. Types of torts trials Automobile accident cases accounted for 49% of all tort trials in courts of general jurisdiction during 1996 and premises liability cases 22%. Approximately 12% of tort trials were medical malpractice cases, and 6% were other negligence cases. Type of trial verdict Most tort trial cases were decided by a jury (85%) rather than a judge (12%).***Footnote 3: The term verdict is used throughout the report to refer to jury verdicts and judgments entered by a judge. For size and verdict rule for civil trial juries in State courts of general jurisdiction see State Court Organization, 1998 (NCJ 178932).*** Forty-seven State constitutions guarantee the right to a jury trial in civil cases in State courts.*** Footnote 4: Paul Mogin, "Why Judges, Not Juries, Should Set Punitive Damages," University of Chicago Law Review, 65, 1998, p. 179.*** Similar to the Federal rule (Fed. R. Civ. P. 38) most States require either the plaintiff or the defendant to demand a jury trial, otherwise they forfeit the right to a jury and the case is decided by a judge. The frequency of jury verdicts varied by the kind of tort case. Asbestos trial cases were most likely to be decided by a jury verdict (99%), followed by medical malpractice cases (93%) and automobile accident cases (89%). Litigants An estimated 37,561 litigants (plaintiffs and defendants) were involved in the 10,278 tort trials in the Nation's 75 largest counties during 1996. There were an estimated 15,600 plaintiffs and 22,000 defendants. Thirty-eight percent of tort trials involved one plaintiff and one defendant (not shown in a table). The median number of plaintiffs and defendants differed little by the type of tort case. Asbestos cases provided an exception with a median of 18 defendants per case. Litigant pairings For each case data were collected on whether the plaintiff was an individual, government, business, or hospital. Similar information was collected for each defendant. A typical tort trial case involved an individual suing another individual (42%) or a business (39%). In relatively few tort trial cases did an individual sue a government (7%) or a hospital (8%). A business, government, or hospital was the plaintiff in only about 4% of tort trials during 1996. Nonindividual plaintiffs were more common among bench tort trial cases than in tort jury trials. Twelve percent of tort bench trials had a nonindividual plaintiff, compared to 3% of tort jury trials (not shown in a table.) Automobile cases Automobile accident torts, which comprised about half of all tort trials, had a distinctive profile of litigant pairings. The proportion of cases in which an individual sued another individual was 61%. Most (89%) automobile accident tort trials were decided by a jury. Defective products in product liability cases, 1996 * Of the estimated 359 product liability cases for which the type of defective product was known, 52% dealt with asbestos or other toxic chemicals. * Cases involving defective vehicles such as automobiles, motorcycles, or boats accounted for about 8% of tort trials. * Defective construction, electrical, manufacturing, or other equipment was involved in about 15% of tort trial cases in the Nation's 75 largest counties during 1996. * Punitive damages were awarded to plaintiff winners in 5 of the 359 cases (not shown in a table). Product liability trials for which the type of defective product Type of defective was known/a product Number Percent Total 359 100 % Toxic chemicals Asbestos 183 51.0 Other chemicals 5 1.4 Medical/b 22 6.1 Equipment/c 55 15.4 Food Restaurant food 3 0.8 Other foods 5 1.3 Home items and 32 9.0 appliances Vehicles 29 8.2 Other products 26 7.3 Note: The estimated total number of product liability cases is 421. See table 1, asbestos and other product liability cases. Of these, an estimated 359 have a known type of product. Detail may not sum to total due to rounding. a/Number of cases include bench and jury trials, trials with a directed verdict, judgments notwithstanding the verdict, and jury trials for defaulted defendants. b/Includes nonprescription and prescrip- tion drugs, cosmetics, breast and other internal implants, and other medical devices. c/Includes construction, electrical, manufacturing, and other equipment. Businesses in tort trials Businesses were plaintiffs in an estimated 374 tort trial cases and defendants in an estimated 4,268 tort trials in general jurisdiction courts in the Nation's 75 largest counties during 1996. The type of business involved in civil trial litigation generally corresponded to the type of case. For example, * Insurance companies were most likely to be involved in automobile tort trial cases as either plaintiffs (67%) and/or defendants (92%). * Real estate development companies were most likely to be defendants (72%) in premises liability trials. * Manufacturers were most likely to be sued in product liability (76%) tort trials. * Banks were more likely (18%) than insurance companies, construction companies, service sellers, or goods sellers to be defendants in trials in which plaintiffs alleged that the tort was committed with some general or specific intent (intentional tort). Plaintiff winners Plaintiffs prevailed in about half of all tort trials in the Nation's 75 largest counties during 1996. Plaintiffs won more often in tort trials decided by a bench verdict (57%) than by a jury verdict (48%). The likelihood of a plaintiff winning varied among the different kinds of torts. Plaintiffs were winners in more than half of automobile accident (58%), intentional tort (57%), and asbestos (56%) tort trials. Plaintiffs in other kinds of tort trials fared less well. Plaintiffs were successful, for example, in 23% of medical malpractice trials and 34% of trials for slander or libel. Plaintiffs experienced different out-comes depending on whether the case was decided by a jury or bench trial. The rate of plaintiff success was greater in bench trials than in jury trials among premises liability, other product liability, and medical malpractice cases. Bodily injury claims by plaintiffs in tort trials, 1996 * Plaintiffs in tort cases often claim bodily injury due to the defendants' careless or reckless behavior. Plaintiffs seek compensation for medical treatment, lost wages, and other forms of monetary and emotional loss. * In 1996 plaintiffs claimed bodily injury in 94% of tort cases decided by a trial in general jurisdiction courts in the 75 largest counties. Plaintiffs claimed bodily injury in all automobile accident, premises and product liability, and medical malpractice trials. * Bodily injury was claimed in 58% of intentional tort and 72% of other negligence trials, while such claims were rare in professional malpractice (12%) and slander/libel trials (3%). Verdicts were in favor of the plaintiff in 52% of the premises liability cases decided by a bench trial and in 38% of jury trials. A similar difference is found between plaintiff win rates in bench trials (70%) and in jury trials (31%) for other product liability torts. Medical and professional malpractice cases decided by a trial in the Nation's 75 largest counties, 1996 * Of the 1,021 malpractice trials for which the type of defendant was known, 900 or 88% dealt with medical malpractice, and 121 or 12% dealt with professional malpractice in the 75 largest counties during 1996. * Overall, plaintiffs won more often in malpractice trials brought against professional defendants (41%) such as attorneys, than they did against medical professionals (26%) such as doctors or dentists. * The median award in medical malpractice trials ($318,000) was higher than the median award in professional malpractice trials ($86,000) that generally do not entail personal injury. Median award amounts were higher among plaintiffs who won malpractice trials against medical doctors, both surgeons ($398,000) and nonsurgeons ($390,000), than against dentists ($80,000) or attorneys ($58,000). * Plaintiff winners were awarded $1 million or more in about a quarter of malpractice trials brought against surgeons. Such high award amounts were rare, however, when plaintiffs won against dentists, attorneys, or other professionals. Final awards Juries and judges awarded an estimated $2 billion dollars to plaintiff winners in general jurisdiction courts in the Nation's 75 largest counties during 1996. The median award was an estimated $31,000. Final award amounts may include compensatory awards for economic damages associated with actual financial losses, noneconomic damages related to, for instance, emotional pain and suffering, inconvenience, or mental anguish, and punitive damages which are intended to punish defendants whose actions were grossly negligent or intentional.***Footnote 5: Economic and noneconomic damages cannot be distinguished in the data for detailed analysis.*** Half of plaintiff winners received $18,000 or more in automobile accident cases and about $22,000 in slander/libel cases. The median final award of $30,000 in tort jury trials and $34,000 in tort bench trials did not differ statistically. Final damages of over $250,000 were awarded to 17% of plaintiff winners of tort trials in the Nation's 75 largest counties during 1996. About 6% of plaintiff winners were awarded over $1 million. Awards of over $1 million were received by plaintiff winners in 24% of other product liability jury trials and 22% of medical malpractice jury trials. Punitive damage awards Punitive damages were awarded in about 3% of tort trials with a plaintiff winner in the Nation's 75 largest counties during 1996. About $463 million in punitive damages was awarded to 162 plaintiff winners in tort trials. The median punitive damage award was $38,000. Plaintiff winners were more likely to be awarded punitive damages in bench (8%) than jury (3%) trials. While judges were more likely to award punitive damages, the amounts they awarded did not differ from those of juries. The median punitive damage awards for tort jury trials ($27,000) and for tort bench trials ($75,000) are not statistically different. Monetary awards and the role of plaintiff negligence A plaintiff's own negligence may play a part in causing the plaintiff's injury. In six States (Alabama, Maryland, South Carolina, Delaware, North Carolina, and Virginia)***Footnote 6: American Jurisprudence, 2nd edition (1989, supp. 1995), 57B, pp. 1131-49.*** any negligence on the part of the plaintiff bars recovery of any damages from defendants, referred to as contributory negligence.***Footnote 7: Garner, Bryan A. (ed.), Black's Law Dictionary, West Publishing Co., 1996.*** All other States, however, abide by some form of comparative negligence, in which damages recoverable by the plaintiff are proportionally reduced according to the level of the plaintiff's negligence. For a description of the different types of comparative negligence and how States are classified see Civil Trial Cases and Verdicts in Large Counties, 1996 (NCJ 173426). The largest punitive damage awards in the 45 sampled counties * The largest punitive damage amount of $138 million was awarded by a jury to 22 individual plaintiff winners in a negligence case against service seller defendants. The trial lasted 21 days resulting in a final award amount of $143,400,000 -- the largest in the sample. * The largest punitive damage awarded in a bench verdict was $2 million to two plaintiff winners in a premises liability trial involving a bodily injury claim against service seller defendants. The case lasted over 5 years from filing to the final judgment. The final award of $21,280,000 was awarded to the plaintiff winners after a 1-day trial. Compensatory damages awarded to plaintiff winners were reduced in 16% of tort trials in general jurisdiction courts in the Nation's 75 largest counties during 1996. These awards were reduced by about 43%, on average. Compensatory damage awards were reduced in 36% of premises liability cases decided by a jury verdict. Compensatory award amounts were not reduced in any of the slander/libel trials won by plaintiffs. On average, monetary awards were reduced by about 58% in asbestos cases, 45% in premises liability cases, and 42% in automobile accident cases. Reduced compensatory damages awarded to plaintiff winners were more common among jury than bench tort trials in the Nation's 75 largest counties during 1996. Among tort jury trials alone, about 18% of awards to plaintiff winners were reduced by 43% on average. About 3% of damages awarded to plaintiff winners in bench trials were reduced by an average of 32%. Case processing time Half of the 10,047 jury and bench tort trial cases for which case processing time is known went from filing of the complaint to verdict or final judgment in an estimated 21.9 months or more. Among bench trials, the median time to disposition was 18.6 months, compared to a median of 22.2 months among jury trials. Half of the intentional tort trials decided by a jury went from filing of the complaint to verdict in 22.0 months or more compared to 16.4 months when decided by a judge. Fifty-five percent of tort jury trials were decided in less than 2 years compared to 65% of tort bench trials. Thirteen percent of tort jury trials took 4 years or more. Asbestos jury trials, in particular, tended to take somewhat longer. Of the 175 asbestos jury trials, 54% lasted 4 years or more from filing of the complaint to the verdict. Trial length Bench trial proceedings tended to be concluded in less time than jury trials. Except for professional malpractice trials, the median bench trial began and ended on the same day (not shown in a table). The median length of jury trials was 3 days overall (not shown in a table). Half of asbestos jury trials lasted nearly 2 weeks or more (a median of 11 days). Half of medical malpractice and professional malpractice trials lasted 6 days or more. The longest case processing time in the 45 sampled counties The longest case in the sample was an automobile accident case with a bodily injury claim filed by two individual plaintiffs against four business defendants. The case took about 15 years from filing of the complaint to the final jury verdict. The trial lasted 11 days. The plaintiffs won $115,275 in compensatory damages. No punitive damages were awarded. Tort jury trials in 1992 * The number of tort cases decided by jury verdict in State courts of general jurisdiction in the 75 largest counties did not differ significantly from 1992 (9,431) to 1996 (8,768). * Overall, plaintiffs were no more likely to win tort jury trials in 1996 (48%) than they were in 1992 (50%). They were less successful, however, in malpractice trials decided by a jury. Plaintiffs won 23% of medical malpractice jury trials in 1996, down from 30% in 1992. Similarly, they won 36% of professional malpractice jury trials in 1996, down from 53% in 1992. * Half of plaintiff winners in tort jury trials won $30,000 or more during 1996 compared to $57,000 during 1992. This decline is due, in part, to smaller median amounts awarded by juries to plaintiff winners in automobile accident trials. Number of jury trials Percent Final awards to plaintiff winners which the wi plaintiff Number Median Percent over Case type ner was know winners/a of cases (thousands $1 million All jury tort trials 9,377 50.3% 4,574 $57 8.3% Automobile 3,880 60.4% 2,280 $33 4.4% Premises liability 1,944 44.5 841 65 6.1 Product liability/b 637 55.7 342 124 15.6 Intentional tort 435 46.6 195 58 6.6 Medical malpractice 1,354 30.5 403 225 24.8 Professional malpractice 176 53.4 92 174 16.7 Slander/libel 66 41.6 27 28 13.9 Other negligence 885 46.9 393 72 11.1 Note: The number of trials excludes cases with a directed verdict and cases in which the trial winner was not known. Data on jury trial winners and final award amounts were available for 96.6% of sampled jury tort trials. The 1992 final award amounts are adjusted for inflation and presented in 1996 dollars. Final award amounts include both compensatory and punitive damages. In this study, cases are classified by the primary case type, though many cases have multiple claims (contract and tort). Under laws in almost all States, only tort claims qualify for punitive damages. If a contract or real property case involved punitive damages, it involved a related tort claim. For additional information, see Tort Cases in Large Counties, 1992 (NCJ 153177). a/Excludes cases with a directed verdict, cases in which the plaintiff and defendant won damages and cases in which the plaintiff won the liability trial. b/Includes asbestos, breast implant, and other product liability trials. Data source: Civil Justice Survey of State Courts, 1992 (ICPSR 6587). Data can be obtained from the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD): http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/NACJD/home.html Tort cases in U.S. district courts, 1996 * Of the 250,387 civil cases terminated in U.S. district courts*(U.S. district courts exercise jurisdiction in civil actions between private parties arising from the interpretation and application of the U.S. Constitution, acts of congress, or treaties, actions between residents of different States, and cases where the U.S. Government is the plaintiff or defendant). during fiscal year 1996, 20% (49,063) were tort claims. About 3% (1,507) of these tort claims were terminated by a jury or bench trial. * A jury decided tort trials less often in U.S. district courts (73%) than they did in State general jurisdiction courts in the 75 largest counties during 1996 (85%). * Plaintiffs won just under half of tort trials in both U.S. district courts (45%) and State general jurisdiction courts in the 75 largest counties (48%). Plaintiff winners, however, were awarded less monetary damages in the State courts, with a median of $32,000, compared to the median of $132,500 awarded to plaintiff winners of tort trials decided in U.S. district courts during 1996. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Civil Master File, 1996. See also Federal Tort Trials and Verdicts, 1996-97, BJS Bulletin, NCJ 172855, February 1999. Tort reform in the States Data from general jurisdiction courts in 16 States for which information was available indicate that tort filings rose 43% between 1975 and 1998. Most of this increase occurred between 1975 and 1986.***Footnote 1: B. Ostrom and N. Kauder, Examining the Work of State Courts, 1998: A National Perspective from the Court Statistics Project, National Center for State Courts, Williamsburg, VA, 1999.*** To deal with this increase, most States enacted some sort of tort reform to discourage litigation. The long-term impact of these reforms on reducing tort caseloads has been mixed.***Footnote 2: Thomas B. Marvell, "Tort Caseload Trends and the Impact of Tort Reforms," The Justice System Journal, 17, 1994, pp. 193-206.*** Most tort reform in the States falls into the following issue areas: Joint and several liability The most common reform, enacted in 33 States, has sought to make each defendant in a tort lawsuit responsible for the damages caused by his or her own negligence (proportionate liability). In about a third of the States, however, each defendant in a tort lawsuit is liable for the entire amount of the plaintiff's damages regardless of a defendant's degree of fault (joint and several liability). Punitive damages Punitive damage reforms have been enacted in 30 States. Reforms include placing caps on the amount of punitive damages that can be awarded, requiring clear and convincing evidence to establish punitive damage liability, and making punitive damages proportional to the type of offense alleged. Collateral sources In 21 States tort reforms have been enacted that allow defendants to admit into court evidence that a plaintiff has received damages from an independent source, such as an insurance policy, wages or medical services, or worker's compensation. In more than half the States, however, defendants are prohibited from introducing evidence of outside benefits received by plaintiffs. Pre-judgment interest In 11 States tort reforms have been enacted to either limit or prohibit plaintiffs from receiving compensation for the time lag between the tort action or filing of the lawsuit and the actual payment of damages. Most States, however, allow such pre-judgment interest, intending to encourage early settlements and reduce congestion in the courts. Noneconomic damages Seven States have enacted reforms that limit awards to plaintiffs for noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering or emotional distress. The amount of these caps and how they are applied vary across these States. Maryland, for example, caps noneconomic damages at $500,000, while Kansas has a cap of $250,000 for pain and suffering only. Methodology Definitions of disposition types: Jury trial -- A trial held before and decided by a group of laypersons selected according to the law presided over by a judge culminating in a verdict for the plaintiff(s) and/or defendant(s). Bench trial (non jury trial) -- A trial held in the absence of a jury and decided by a judge culminating in a judgment for the plaintiff(s) or defendant(s). Directed verdict -- In a case in which the party with the burden of proof has failed to present a prima facie case for jury consideration, a trial judge may order the entry of a verdict without allowing the jury to consider it, because, as a matter of law, there can be only one such verdict. Judgment notwithstanding the verdict ("JNOV" or judgment non obstante veredicto) -- A judgment rendered in favor of one party despite the finding of a jury verdict in favor of the other party. Jury trials for defaulted defendants -- Some States make provisions for a jury to be empaneled even if the defendants in a case fail to appear and enter a defense. The purpose of a trial is to decide issues such as amount of damages. See Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 1.500, section (e). Definitions of civil case types: Torts -- Claims arising from personal injury or property damage caused by negligent or intentional acts of another person or business. Specific tort case types include: automobile accident; premises liability (injury caused by the dangerous condition of residential or commercial property); medical malpractice (by doctor, dentist, or medical professional); other professional malpractice (for example by lawyers, engineers, architects); product liability (injury or damage caused by defective products; injury caused by toxic substances such as asbestos); libel/slander (injury to reputation); intentional tort (vandalism, intentional personal injury); and other negligent acts (negligence against another party for an act not represented by the other case categories used in this study such as the negligent supervision of a dog resulting in an attack). Source: Definitions were developed by the National Center for State Courts through consultation with NCSC staff attorneys, law professors, and from Black's Law Dictionary. Sample The sample design for the 1996 civil trial study was the same one used for the 1992 civil jury study. The sample is a 2-stage stratified sample with 45 of the 75 most populous counties selected at the first stage. The 75 counties were divided into 4 strata based on the number of civil dispositions for 1990 obtained through telephone interviews with court staff in the general jurisdiction trial courts. Stratum 1 consisted of the 14 counties with the largest number of civil case dispositions. Every county in stratum 1 was selected with certainty for the sample. Stratum 2 consisted of 15 counties with 12 chosen for the sample. From strata 3, 10 of the 20 counties were selected. Nine of the 26 counties in stratum 4 were included in the sample. For the 1996 study, the second stage of the sample design involved generating lists of cases that would be collected and coded. Prior to drawing the 1996 case sample, each participating jurisdiction was asked to identify a roster of cases that had been decided by jury trial or bench trial between January 1, 1996, and December 31, 1996. Trial cases were to meet the definitional criteria for jury and bench trials as defined in Black's Law Dictionary: (1) A jury trial was defined as "a trial held before and decided by a jury of laypersons and presided over by a judge culminating in a verdict for the plaintiff(s) or defendant(s), and (2) A bench trial was defined as "a trial held in the absence of a jury and decided by a judge culminating in a judgment for the plaintiff(s) or defendant(s)." Cases that did not meet these definitional criteria were not to be included in the jury and bench lists. The study plan was to obtain approximately 300 jury and 300 bench cases from the court of general jurisdiction in each of the counties selected for the study. In courts that reported approximately 300 or less jury or bench trials, all trials were to be coded. In courts that reported more than 300 jury or 300 bench trials, a list of cases was to be provided to project staff and a random sample of 275 drawn from the jury and bench trial case list. For jury and bench case lists in which the case type was known, any remaining medical malpractice, professional malpractice and product liability cases not initially selected were to be included in the sample in order to over sample these case types. At the second stage of sampling for jury cases, in 39 of the 45 jurisdictions all tort, contract, and real property rights cases decided by jury verdict between January 1, 1996, and December 31, 1996 were selected. In an additional 3 jurisdictions, where the total number of jury cases exceeded 300 and where case type could be identified, a random sample of about 275 cases was drawn from a list of tort, contract, and real property jury trials provided by the court. Any remaining medical malpractice, professional malpractice, and product liability cases not initially chosen in the initial sample were also included. In the remaining 3 jurisdictions where the total number of jury cases exceeded 300 and case type could not be identified, a random sample of about 275 cases was selected from the list of jury trials. At the second stage of sampling for bench cases, in 41 of the 45 jurisdictions all tort, contract, and real property rights cases decided by bench verdict between January 1, 1996, and December 31, 1996, were selected. In 1 jurisdiction where the total number of bench cases exceeded 300 and the case type could be identified, a random sample of about 275 cases was drawn from a list of tort, contract, and real property bench trials. Any remaining medical malpractice, professional malpractice, and product liability cases not initially chosen in the random sample also were included. In the remaining 3 jurisdictions where the total number of bench cases exceeded 300 and case type could not be identified, a random sample of about 275 cases were selected from the list of bench trials. During the coding process in all sites, it was discovered that some courts included in their list some jury and bench trials that did not meet the study definitional criteria of a trial. These cases were excluded from the database. By excluding cases that did not meet the study criteria, some jurisdictions in which sampling was utilized have final sample sizes of less than 275 cases. Data on 6,713 civil jury trial cases and 2,312 civil trial bench cases that met the study criteria were collected in the 45 courts. The final sample consisted of 9,025 tort, contract, and real property rights case decided by jury or bench verdict. Populations of jury and bench trials In jurisdictions where second stage case sampling was not used, the populations of jury and bench trials reported are based on applying the study criteria in each site and excluding cases that did not meet the study definitions. In the jurisdictions where second stage sampling was used, the true population of trial verdicts according to the study definitions could not be known. It was impossible to know the number of cases that failed to meet the definitional criteria of a trial among the cases that did not make it into the sample. The true population within each of these jurisdictions, therefore, was estimated by applying the same rejection rate generated from the selected sample after it was coded. For example, Orange County reported 340 jury trials in 1996. A random sample of 275 cases was chosen and when coded according to study criteria produced 221 jury trial verdicts. This translates into a rejection rate of 20% of the cases since 20% did not meet the definitional criteria of a jury trial. Applying this rejection rate to the original list of 340 jury trial cases provided by the jurisdiction resulted in an estimated population of 301 jury trials. Sampling error Since the data in this report came from a sample, a sampling error (standard error) is associated with each reported number. The standard error indicates how closely the sample results reflect the true values in the population. In general, if the difference between 2 numbers is greater than twice the standard error for that difference, there is confidence that for 95 out of 100 possible samples a real difference exists and that the apparent difference is not simply the result of chance, or of using a sample rather than the entire population. All differences discussed in the text of this report were statistically significant at or above the 95 percent confidence level. Based on the sample estimates presented in this report, it is possible to calculate a range of values that, with a 95% level of confidence, includes the true value. This range is called a confidence interval. Selected estimates, their standard errors, and confidence intervals are provided in. Data recoding and unobtainable information For each sampled case, a standard coding form was manually completed by on-site court staff to record information about the litigants, case type, processing time and award amounts. Information for which data were not available or collected included the cost of litigation for the parties involved, as well as for others; the actual disbursement of awards; and the number of cases appealed. The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D., is director. This BJS Bulletin presents the third release of findings in a series of reports from the Civil Justice Survey of State Courts, 1996. Marika F. X. Litras, Sidra Lea Gifford, and Carol J. DeFrances of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, and David B. Rottman, Neil LaFountain, and Brian J. Ostrom of the National Center for State Courts wrote this report. Greg W. Steadman provided statistical review. Data collection was supervised by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC); David B. Rottman and Brian J. Ostrom were the project co-directors. John Goerdt, formerly with the NCSC, was the initial project director. Tina Dorsey produced and edited the report. Jayne Robinson administered final production. August 2000, NCJ 179769 End of file 8/18/00 ih