Wisconsin Supreme Court Text Mining: Dissents

A recent post on “text mining” at the Wisconsin Supreme Court examined majority opinions by running them through Linguistic Inquiry Word Count software (LIWC).[1] Today, we’ll apply LIWC to dissents from the same period (2015-16 through 2017-18) and compare the findings with those obtained for the majority opinions. Justices generally do not invest time in writing dissents without an adamant belief that the court has made a significant mistake, so it may be that their prose in dissent will generate different LIWC “scores” than those that we encountered for majority opinions.[Continue Reading…]

Fantasy League Update

Two of the decisions filed this week contributed points to Fantasy League participants. Amicus briefs by Legal Action of Wisconsin (in Security Finance v. Brian Kirsch) and the Frank J. Remington Center (in State v. Garcia) each delivered a point to their teams—the Writs and the Citations respectively. However, they could not keep pace with the Gavels of the State Public Defender’s Office, who tightened their grip on first place by adding 6 points for a brief, oral argument, and 3-3 per curiam outcome in State v. Garcia.

For complete, updated standings, click here.

Fantasy League Update

The supreme court did not file any decisions this week--hence, no change in the standings. … [Continue reading]

Text Mining at the Wisconsin Supreme Court: Majority Opinions

Specialized computer programs can inspect large document collections for information that researchers would have difficulty detecting unaided. One such tool is Linguistic Inquiry Word Count software (LIWC), devised to study “the various emotional, … [Continue reading]

Fantasy League Update

The lone decision filed this week did not result in any points for Fantasy League teams--hence, no change in the standings. … [Continue reading]

Crowd-Source Reminder

This is a monthly reminder to readers to “nominate” Wisconsin Supreme Court cases from the 2018-19 term that contain surprising aspects.  As I did last year, I will maintain a collection of cases and comments submitted and post them at the end of the … [Continue reading]

Fantasy League Update

This week, the Gavels of the State Public Defender’s Office padded their lead with five points from a brief and oral argument in State v. Fugere. Click here for the complete, updated standings. … [Continue reading]

Judges Neubauer and Hagedorn: A Look at Their Voting Records

Next week, a small percentage of Wisconsin’s eligible voters will choose Justice Shirley Abrahamson’s successor on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. As it happens, the two contenders for her seat—Brian Hagedorn and Lisa Neubauer—are not only both judges … [Continue reading]

Fantasy League Update

The four decisions filed this week boosted the standing of three teams. With 8 points from Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren (for a brief and a favorable decision, but no oral argument, in Kieninger v. Crown Equipment), the Waivers gained the most ground, … [Continue reading]

Fantasy League Update

Both decisions filed this week affected the standings. The Citations gained 10 points from O’Neil, Cannon, Hollman, DeJong & Laing (a brief, oral argument, and favorable outcome in The Peter Ogden Family Trust of 2008 v. Board of Review for the … [Continue reading]