U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin Civil Justice Survey of State Courts, 2001 Tort Trials and Verdicts in Large Counties, 2001 November 2004, NCJ 206240 -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/ttvlc01.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 Thomas H. Cohen, J.D., Ph.D. BJS Statistician --------------------------------------------------------------------- Highlights Median final damage awards in tort trials with individual plaintiff winners versus different defendant types in the Nation's 75 largest counties, 2001 * During 2001 an estimated 7,948 tort cases were disposed of by trial in State courts of general jurisdiction in the Nation's 75 largest counties. * Juries decided over 90% of these tort cases, while judges adjudicated less than 10%. * The 7,218 tort jury trials disposed of in 2001 represents a 23% decline from the 9,431 tort jury trials disposed of in these counties in 1992, consistent with data from 30 States showing decreases in the number of tort claims filed. * In tort jury trials the overall median damage awards have declined 56% from $64,000 in 1992 to $28,000 in 2001. * Fifty-two percent of tort trials involved a private individual suing another individual, while 31% involved an individual suing a business. * Plaintiffs won in 52% of tort trials in 2001. This win rate has remained relatively unchanged since 1992. * About 5% of plaintiff winners in tort trials were awarded punitive damages. The median punitive damage award was $25,000. * Litigants sought post verdict relief -- amended judgment, judgment notwithstanding the verdict, new trial, or award modification -- in 29% of all tort trials; 23% of these litigants seeking relief were granted relief, most frequently an award modification. * Litigants filed a notice of appeal to a State appellate court in 13% of tort trials disposed of in 2001. --------------------------------------------------------------- Torts accounted for nearly two-thirds of the estimated 12,000 tort, contract, and real property cases disposed of by bench or jury trial in State courts of general jurisdiction in the Nation's 75 largest counties in 2001.***Footnote 1: Courts of general jurisdiction typically handle civil disputes that are over certain monetary amounts. The exceptions are in States like California that have merged their limited and general jurisdiction courts.*** A tort involves one party alleging injury, damage, or financial loss stemming from the negligent or intentional acts of another party. During 2001 over 90% of tort trials were decided by a jury, while judges adjudicated less than 10% of these cases. Plaintiffs won in about half of all tort trials and were awarded a total of about $2.3 billion in compensatory and punitive damages. Half of all plaintiff winners in tort jury and bench trials received damage awards of $27,000 or more. Appeals to a State intermediate appellate court or court of last resort were filed in 13% of tort trials disposed of in 2001. These are some of the findings from a survey of tort trials in State courts of general jurisdiction. This report is the third in a series based on data collected from the Civil Justice Survey of State Courts, 2001.***Footnote 2:The two reports produced from the Civil Justice Survey of State Courts 2001 are Civil Trial Cases and Verdicts in Large Counties, 2001, NCJ 202803, and Medical Malpractice Trials and Verdicts in Large Counties, 2001, NCJ 203098, *** The first report of this series provided a general overview of tort, contract, and real property cases decided by a bench or jury trial in the Nation's 75 most populous counties in 2001. The second report focused on medical malpractice cases disposed of by trial. This third report describes the contours of tort trial litigation in the Nation's 75 largest counties. The sample of civil trials excluded civil matters that did not involve tort, contract, or real property cases. Federal trials, trials in counties outside the 75 most populous counties, and trials in State courts of limited jurisdiction were also excluded from the sample. Types of tort trials During 2001 State courts of general jurisdiction in the Nation's 75 largest counties disposed of an estimated 7,948 tort trials. A prior BJS study on tort cases found that a minority (about 3%) were adjudicated by trial and that most (73%) were disposed of by settlement.***Footnote 3: See BJS, Tort Cases in Large Counties, 1992, NCJ 153177, .*** Although tort trials account for a small percentage of tort dispositions, they are crucial to examine because they provide key information on plaintiff award compensation, punitive damages, and case processing times. Tort cases that settle rarely include this type of information as part of the public record. Of the estimated 7,948 tort trials disposed of in the Nation's 75 largest counties in 2001, about half were automobile accident cases. Premises liability and medical malpractice each accounted for nearly 15% of tort cases disposed of by trial. An estimated 2% of tort trials were product liability cases, in which the primary claim involved asbestos, toxic substances, breast implants, tobacco, or other defective product matters. Type of trial verdict The majority of tort trials (93%) were decided by a jury, while judges adjudicated about 7% of tort trials. Two percent of tort jury trials were disposed of by directed verdict, judgments notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), or default jury trial. (For definitions, see page 9.) The right to a jury trial is guaranteed in most States; however, if neither the plaintiff nor the defendant makes a formal jury trial request, that right is forfeited, and the trial takes place before a judge. Juries disposed of an estimated 9 out of 10 medical malpractice (96%), automobile accident (93%), product liability (92%), and premises liability (91%) tort trial cases. At least a fifth of conversion, professional malpractice, intentional torts, and false arrest-imprisonment cases were adjudicated before judges. Litigants An estimated 24,904 litigants (plaintiffs and defendants) were involved in the 7,948 tort trials disposed of in the Nation's 75 largest counties in 2001 (not shown in a table). Of these litigants in tort trials, 11,209 were plaintiffs, and 13,695 were defendants. Seventy-percent of tort trials were litigated by one plaintiff, while 56% involved one defendant. Litigant pairings For each tort trial, data were collected on whether the plaintiff or defendant was an individual, government, business, or hospital. Four-fifths of tort trials involved an individual suing either another individual (52%) or a business (31%). Individuals sued hospitals or governmental agencies in less than 15% of tort trials. A relatively small number of tort trials involved non-individual plaintiffs. Governments and businesses were plaintiffs in an estimated 4% of all tort trials. Among bench trials non-individual plaintiffs were more common. Governments or businesses were plaintiffs in about 10% of bench tort trials (not shown in a table). Automobile trials versus other tort trials Accounting for around half of all tort trials, automobile accident cases are characterized by marked differences in their litigant pairings. Nearly three-fourths of automobile accident trials involved individuals suing other individuals. In comparison, individuals sued other individuals in 28% of non-automobile accident tort trials. Individual plaintiffs were more likely to litigate against businesses (42%) or hospital defendants (18%) in trials where the primary claim did not involve an automobile accident. -------------------------------------------------------------- Defective products in product liability trials in the 75 largest counties, 2001 * Of the 144 product liability trials for which the type of defective product was known, 28% dealt with asbestos or other toxic substances. * Cases involving defective vehicles such as automobiles, trucks, or airplanes accounted for about 12% of the 144 product liability trials. * Defective construction, electrical, or manufacturing equipment was involved in about 19% of the 144 product liability trials disposed of in the Nation's 75 largest counties during 2001. * Punitive damages were awarded to plaintiff winners in 3 of 144 product liability trials (not shown in a table). * There was 1 tobacco product liability trial in the Nation's 75 largest counties in 2001. This was a jury trial involving 1 plaintiff against 4 business defendants. The jury ruled in favor of the defendants. Note: Type of defective product was known for 144 of the 158 product liability trials. Detail may not sum to total because of rounding. a Trials include bench and jury trials, trials with a directed verdict, judgments notwithstanding the verdict, and jury trials for defaulted defendants. b Includes construction, electrical, and manufacturing equipment. c Includes home furniture, small appliances, workshop tools, yard equipment, TV/Stereo/VCR appliances, and sporting goods. d Includes natural gas, tobacco, and other products. e Includes automobiles, trucks, and other forms of transport (airplanes). f Includes nonprescription and prescription drugs, cosmetics, breast and other internal implants, and other medical equipment and devices. g Includes food in restaurants and grocery stores. ------------------------------------------ Plaintiff winners Plaintiffs prevailed in about half of all tort trials disposed of in the Nation's 75 largest counties during 2001. The plaintiff win rates varied considerably, depending on the type of tort case litigated. Among some tort case categories such as automobile, asbestos, and animal attack, the estimated plaintiff win rates approached or exceeded 60%. Plaintiffs were less successful in other kinds of tort cases. Plaintiffs prevailed in less than a third of medical malpractice trials and won in less than a half of premises liability, slander/libel, false arrest, and other product liability trials. Plaintiffs prevailed to a greater extent in tort trials heard by judges than juries. Judges found in favor of plaintiffs in nearly two-thirds of tort trials, while juries ruled for the plaintiffs in about half of tort trials. Final awards During 2001 plaintiff winners in tort jury and bench trials were awarded an estimated $2.3 billion in compensatory and punitive damages in the Nation's 75 largest counties. The median award for plaintiff winners in tort trials was $27,000. About 19% of these plaintiff winners received damage awards over $250,000, and an estimated 8% were awarded at least $1 million or more in damages. Damage awards for plaintiff winners in tort trials differed markedly by case type. In some tort case categories the median awards were relatively modest. For example, automobile and premises liability cases, which together accounted for about three-fourths of all tort trials with a plaintiff winner, generated median awards of $16,000 and $59,000, respectively. In other tort case categories, the median awards were considerably higher. Half the plaintiff winners in asbestos cases, for example, were awarded damages of $1.7 million or more. Since asbestos cases tended to involve multiple plaintiffs, few plaintiffs received the whole award amount when successful in these trials. In medical malpractice trials the median awards ($422,000) were nearly 16 times greater than the overall median awards in tort trials. Damage verdicts of $1 million or more were awarded in about a third of medical malpractice trials. These higher award amounts are partially explained by the fact that in 9 out of 10 medical malpractice trials the plaintiffs alleged that the defendant's negligence caused a permanent injury or death (not shown in a table). The median final award of $28,000 in tort jury trials and $23,000 in tort bench trials did not differ statistically (not shown in a table). Punitive damage awards Plaintiffs are entitled to punitive damages when the defendant's actions are so "willful, malicious, or fraudulent" that ordinary damages alone would not fully compensate the plaintiff for an inflicted injury. Unlike other forms of damage relief afforded to plaintiffs, punitive damages serve as a means for "punishing the defendant" and deterring others from committing similar actions (Black's Law Dictionary). Nearly 60% of plaintiff winners in slander/libel trials and about 36% of plaintiff winners in intentional tort trials were awarded punitive damages. Punitive damages were awarded to less than 5% of plaintiff winners in product liability trials. Punitive damages were more likely to be awarded in bench (11%) than in jury (5%) tort trials. The median punitive damage awards in bench ($15,000) and jury ($23,000) tort trials, however, was not significantly different (not shown in a table). -------------------------------------------- Largest tort damage award In the 2001 database the tort trial that generated the largest damage award involved a case alleging malicious prosecution. In 1999 the defendant, who was both a general manager and equity holder for an automobile outlet company, was accused of stealing millions from the company. Federal officials responded by launching a fraud investigation into the defendant's activities. The defendant's attorney advised the defendant to file a RICO suit against the automobile outlet's owners. The RICO suit alleged that the owners were "responsible for any missing inventory" and were "engaged in a racketeering conspiracy." The suit was dismissed in Federal court, and the owners then filed suit against both the defendant and the defendant's attorney alleging "abuse of the civil process." Soon after the owners filed suit, the defendant fled the country. The trial took place before a jury in Philadelphia and lasted 7 days. In the second week of trial, the defendant's attorney settled, leaving the fugitive defendant as the sole person being sued. The jury found in favor of the auto outlet's owners and awarded $50 million in compensatory and $100 million in punitive damages. The defendant never appeared to contest the case and as of 2002 was still a fugitive. Source for additional case details: The National Law Journal, February 4, 2002. --------------------------------------------------- The role of contributory or comparative plaintiff negligence A plaintiff's own negligent actions may contribute wholly or partially to the injury sustained. Six States maintain the doctrine of contributory negligence.***Footnote 4: Alabama, Maryland, South Carolina, Delaware, North Carolina, and Virginia are contributory negligence States. American Jurisprudence, 2nd edition (1989, supp. 1995), 57B, pp. 1131-49.*** In these States any plaintiff negligence automatically bars recovery for damages. The remaining States use differing forms of comparative negligence in which damages are proportionally reduced according to the plaintiff's negligence. In States that employ contributory or comparative negligence, compensatory damages awarded to plaintiff winners were reduced in 14% of tort trials disposed of in the Nation's 75 largest counties during 2001. These awards were reduced 38% on average. In a third of the premises liability trials with a plaintiff winner, the compensatory awards were reduced due to the plaintiff's own negligence. The average award reduction in these trials was about 42%. Plaintiff winners tended to receive award reductions more frequently in jury than in bench trials. Sixteen percent of plaintiff winners in jury trials had their awards reduced, while in bench trials, 6% of plaintiff awards were reduced (not shown in a table). Case processing time Half of the estimated 7,900 tort cases disposed of by trial in the Nation's 75 largest counties in 2001 went from filing of the complaint to final verdict or judgment within an estimated 22 months. Among medical malpractice and non-asbestos product liability trials, the median case processing times from filing to disposition were 29 and 28 months, respectively. Asbestos product liability trials, in comparison, were processed within a median of 10 months. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Tort trials in U.S. district courts, 2001 * U.S. district courts exercise jurisdiction in civil actions between private parties that involve the interpretation and application of a Federal question arising from the U.S. Constitution, or in cases where the parties reside in different States or countries and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, or in cases where the U.S. Government is the plaintiff or defendant. Of the 248,174 civil cases terminated in the U.S. district courts during fiscal year 2001, 14% (34,918) were tort claims. About 4% (1,234) of these tort claims were terminated by a jury or bench trial. * A jury decided tort trials less often in U.S. district courts (79%) than in State courts of general jurisdiction in the Nation's 75 largest counties during 2001 (93%). * Plaintiffs won about half of tort trials in both U.S. district courts (51%)and State courts of general jurisdiction in the Nation's 75 largest counties (52%). Plaintiff winners, however, were awarded less monetary damages in State courts, with a median of $27,000, compared to a median of $179,000 awarded to plaintiff winners of tort trials decided by U.S. district courts during 2001. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Civil Master File, fiscal year 2001. Published reports on Federal District Court data are also available from the U.S. Administrative Office of the Courts: . See also Civil Trial Cases and Verdicts in Large Counties, 2001, BJS Bulletin, NCJ 202803, April 2004. ---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- Trends in tort jury trials * The number of tort trials decided by a jury in the Nation's 75 largest counties declined 23%, from 9,431 trials in 1992 to 7,218 trials in 2001. The growing use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and other tort reform efforts aimed at limiting damage awards and tort litigation may provide a partial explanation for this trend. The National Center for State Courts also reports that tort filings in 30 States declined 9% from 1992 to 2001, contributing to the decrease in tort trials.***Footnote 5: The sources for these findings are Tort Reform Record, American Tort Reform Association, 2003, and B. Ostrom, N. Kauder, and R. LaFountain, Examining the Work of State Courts, 2002: A National Perspective from the Court Statistics Project, 2003.*** * The plaintiff win rate in tort jury trials remained relatively stable from 1992 to 2001. During this period about half of all plaintiffs prevailed in tort jury trials. Some tort case categories witnessed declining plaintiff win rates. In 1992 nearly a third of plaintiffs prevailed in medical malpractice cases tried by a jury; by 2001 about a fourth of plaintiffs won medical malpractice jury trials. The plaintiff win rate also declined in product liability jury trials. Plaintiffs won 56% of product liability jury trials in 1992,but 45% of these trials in 2001. * The median damage awards in tort jury trials declined from $64,000 in 1992 to $28,000 in 2001.***Footnote 6: The 1992 damage award amount was adjusted to account for inflation. The adjustment was calculated through the U.S. Department of Labor's website .*** The smaller damage awards imposed by juries in automobile accident trials partially explains this trend. At least half of plaintiff winners in automobile accident jury trials won $37,000 or more in damages in 1992; by 2001 the median damage award for plaintiff winners in automobile accident trials had declined to $16,000. * Medical malpractice and product liability trials had marked increases in their median jury damage awards. In product liability jury trials, the median award amounts were at least 3 times higher in 2001 ($543,000) than in 1992 ($140,000). The median award amounts for medical malpractice jury trials nearly doubled from $253,000 in 1992 to $431,000 in 2001. * Since 1992 the percentage of tort jury trials with punitive damage awards has remained unchanged. The reported differences in plaintiff winners receiving punitive damages between 1992 (4%) and 2001 (5%) were not statistically significant. * In 1992 half of all tort cases proceeded from initial filing to jury verdict in nearly 25 months, while during 2001, the time was 22 months. These differences were not statistically significant. ---------------------------------------------- Tracking post verdict motions for relief in tort trials After a tort trial reaches verdict or judgment, litigants often file post-verdict motions seeking to modify or overturn the trial outcome. These can include motions for judgments notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) or for an amended judgment, motions for a new trial, motions to modify the award, or motions for some "other" form of relief. A motion for a JNOV or an amended judgment is filed when the moving party requests that the judge render a verdict in favor of one party despite the fact that the jury or judge found in favor of the other party. A motion for a new trial is filed when one party seeks to have the verdict or judgment discarded and the case tried again. A motion to modify the award occurs when one party seeks to have the damage award increased or reduced. A motion for "other relief" typically involves attorney fees and other court costs.***Footnote 7: Paula Hannaford-Agor, 2004,Not Quite the End of the Road: Post Trial Activity in Civil Litigation, Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.*** Both plaintiffs and defendants sought post verdict relief at similar rates in tort trials where plaintiffs prevailed. Plaintiffs filed motions for post verdict relief in 19% of tort trials where they won, while defendants requested post verdict relief in 23% of tort trials with a plaintiff winner. A variety of underlying factors could drive plaintiff post verdict activity in trials in which the plaintiff received a favorable outcome. These can include pre-trial "high-low" agreements with the defendants or post-trial settlements as well as dissatisfaction with the damage awards imposed at trial. In a "high-low" agreement both parties agree on an acceptable range of damages. If the award falls outside that range, the award is adjusted to fit within the agreed upon range. The types of post verdict relief sought most commonly by plaintiff winners in tort trials were motions for new trials or award modifications. These forms of post verdict relief accounted for nearly 6 out of 7 plaintiff post verdict motions. In tort trials where the defendant filed a subsequent motion for post verdict relief, 60% of those motions were for a new trial while 30% were for a JNOV or amended judgment. Tort trials that the plaintiff did not win also manifested substantial post verdict activity. Plaintiffs filed motions for post verdict relief in about a quarter of tort trials that they lost. In 85% of these cases, the plaintiff requested that the court discard the verdict or judgment and grant a new trial. In tort trials in which the plaintiff did not prevail, defendants rarely engaged in post verdict activity. Less than 5% of defendants sought post verdict relief, in the form of attorney fees and court costs, in tort trials without a plaintiff winner. Plaintiffs were more likely to be granted post verdict relief if they won at trial. The courts granted post verdict relief to 42% of plaintiff winners seeking to have their verdict modified. The most common form of post verdict relief granted to these plaintiffs was an award modification. In comparison 9% of plaintiffs who did not prevail at trial and who subsequently filed a post verdict motion received some form of post trial relief. About half of these plaintiffs were granted a new trial and 38% received some form of "other" relief. Post verdict relief was granted to 28% of defendants who sought to modify a favorable plaintiff verdict or judgment. In nearly two-thirds of these cases, the relief granted was in the form of an award modification and in 14% of these cases a new trial was granted. Although less than 5% of defendants sought to modify a verdict or judgment that went against the plaintiff, nearly a third of these defendants were granted some type of post verdict relief. Appeals in tort trials Filing a notice of appeal to the State's intermediate appellate court or court of last resort represents another option for litigants seeking to overturn or modify a verdict or judgment that they believe does not comply with State law. Appeals to a State supreme or intermediate appellate court were filed in 13% of tort trials (not shown in a table). The appeal rate depended upon the trial outcome. Plaintiffs filed appeals in 4% of tort trials in which they prevailed and 11% of tort trials in which they lost. Defendants gave notice of appeal in 11% of tort trials with a plaintiff winner; however, they rarely filed appeals in tort trials where the plaintiff did not receive a favorable verdict. The rate of appeals also varied substantially by case type. Defendants filed notices of appeal in about 40% of slander/libel and false arrest imprisonment trials in which they lost. Defendants also gave notice of appeal in 28% of medical malpractice, 31% of professional malpractice, and 38% of product liability trials with prevailing plaintiffs. Among tort trials that the plaintiff lost, plaintiffs filed an appeal in at least 20% of product liability and slander/libel trials and in 30% or more of trials involving professional malpractice or conversion issues. 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 (nonjury 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 impaneled even if the defendants in a case fail to appear and enter a defense. The purpose of a trial is typically to decide issues such as amount of damages. 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 (such as by lawyers, engineers, and 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); animal attack (the negligent supervision of a dog or other animal resulting in an attack); conversion (unauthorized use or control of another person's personal property); false arrest/imprisonment (an arrest or imprisonment without the proper legal authority); and other negligent acts (negligence against another party for an act not represented by the other case categories). Sample The sample design for the 2001 civil trial study was similar to the ones used for the 1996 and 1992 BJS civil trial studies. The sample is a 2-stage stratified sample with 46 of the 75 most populous counties selected at the first stage. The 75 counties were divided into 5 strata based on 1990 civil disposition data 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. Stratum 2 consisted of 13 counties with 11 chosen for the sample. From stratum 3, 10 of the 18 counties were selected. Nine of the 26 counties in stratum 4 were included in the sample. Stratum 5 was added to the 2001 sample to replace Norfolk County, Massachusetts, a stratum 4 site that participated in the 1992 and 1996 studies but that fell out of the 75 most populous counties in the 2000 Census. Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, and El Paso County, Texas, were randomly selected from the 4 counties whose population increased sufficiently that they joined the ranks of the 75 most populous counties. The second stage of the sample design involved generating lists of cases that would be coded. Prior to drawing the 2001 case sample, each participating jurisdiction was asked to identify a list of cases that had been disposed of by jury trial or bench trial between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2001. Trial cases were to meet the following definitional criteria for jury and bench trials as defined by the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the National Center for State Courts: (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)." The study plan was to obtain every jury and bench trial disposed from the court of general jurisdiction in each of the counties selected for the study. In courts where the number of trials became too great, a sample of civil trials was selected. Regardless of whether all or a sample of civil trials was collected, every medical malpractice or product liability case was included to oversample these case types. At the second stage of sampling, all tort, contract, and real property cases disposed of by bench or jury verdict between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2001, were selected in 43 jurisdictions. In two of the remaining three jurisdictions (Cook and Philadelphia), a sample of civil trials was selected and then "weighted" to obtain an appropriate number of civil trials. In Bergen County some civil case files were unavailable for coding purposes. Weights were applied in Bergen County in order to account for these missing cases. Data on 6,215 civil jury trial cases, 1,958 civil bench trial cases, and 138 other civil trial cases that met the study criteria were collected in the 46 courts. The final sample consisted of 8,311 tort, contract, and real property cases disposed of by jury or bench trial. Sampling error Since the data in this report came from a sample, a sampling error(standard error)is associated with each reported number. 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 every 100 possible samples a real difference exists and that the apparent difference is not simply the result 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. Standard error estimates were generated by using a bootstrap method (jackknife)available for WESVAR PC. Data coding 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. ------------------------------------------------- The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. Lawrence A. Greenfeld is director. This BJS Bulletin presents the third release of findings in a series of reports from the Civil Justice Survey of State Courts, 2001. Thomas H. Cohen wrote this Bulletin under supervision of Steven K. Smith. Lynn Bauer provided statistical review. Data collection was supervised by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC); Paula Hannaford-Agor was the project director. Paula Hannaford-Agor and Neil LaFountain of the NCSC provided comments. Tom Hester, Devon Adams, and Tina Dorsey edited the report. Jayne Robinson prepared the report for final printing. November 2004, NCJ 206240 J -------------------------------------------------- End of file 10/6/04 ih