Of the 34 authored opinions this term, ten were unanimous (with neither separate concurring opinions or dissents). Of these, the Government prevailed in just four. The Government won three out of four per curiam decisions (there was a fifth per curiam decision, in Hasan, which could be considered a Government loss). The Government also won in the summary disposition of Holsey.

But there were dissenting opinions in 16 of the 34 cases with authored decisions.

Note: After much back-and-forth, I’ve decided to count Judge Erdmann’s separate opinion in Irizarry, joined by Chief Judge Baker, “dissenting in part and concurring in the result,” as a concurring opinion, primarily because even with this separate opinion the court was unanimous in denying relief to the appellant.

Overall, Chief Judge Baker and Judge Stucky were tied for the greatest number of dissenting votes, with seven each. Next was Judge Ryan with five, followed by Senior Judge Cox with three, and Judge Erdmann and Senior Judge Effron with just one each. These dissents favored the Government as follows:

Chief Judge Baker sided with the Government in 5 of 7 dissents (71.4%)

Judge Stucky sided with the Government in 4 of 6 dissents (66.6%) (his seventh dissent was in LRM)

Judge Ryan sided with the Government in 4 dissents (100%) (her fifth dissent was in LRM)

Senior Judge Cox sided with the Government in 1 of 3 dissents (33.3%)

Judge Erdmann was against the Government in his one dissent (0%)

Senior Judge Effron sided with the Government in his one dissent (100%)

Eight of the 34 authored opinions had a lone dissent. Of these:

Chief Judge Baker was the lone dissent in four cases (Hutchins, Tunstall, Gaskins, and Bennitt). All of these dissents sided with the Government.

Judge Stucky was also the lone dissent in four cases (Spicer, Capel, Bowersox, and Goings). In two of these (Spicer and Capel) he sided with the Government.

Eight of the 34 authored opinions were 3-2 decisions. These include the two extraordinary relief cases of LRM and CCR. Of the other 6 (Caldwell, Cote, Riley, Salyer, Halpin, and Wilson), the Government won in only two (Halpin and Wilson). But of all 3-2 cases:

Judge Ryan was the most likely to be in the minority in a 3-2 case. She dissented in five such cases (Riley, Caldwell, LRM, Salyer, and Cote). She was joined in the minority with Judge Stucky in three (Riley, Caldwell, and LRM), with Senior Judge Cox in one (Salyer), and with Chief Judge Baker in one (Cote). Of these five dissents, Judge Ryan sided with the Government in four.

Chief Judge Baker, Judge Stucky, and Senior Judge Cox were next most likely to be in the minority in a 3-2 case, each dissenting in three.

Judge Stucky was in the minority with Judge Ryan each time (Riley, Caldwell, and LRM). Two of these dissents sided with the Government.

Senior Judge Cox was in the minority with Chief Judge Baker in two cases (CCR and Wilson) and with Judge Ryan in one (Salyer). One of these dissents sided with the Government.

Chief Judge Baker dissented in three cases with 3-2 decisions (CCR, Wilson, and Cote) (note that I’m calling his “dissent” in Irizarry a concurrence). He was in the minority with Senior Judge Cox in two cases (CCR and Wilson) and with Judge Ryan in one case (Cote). Only one of these dissents (Cote) sided with the Government.

Judge Erdmann and Senior Judge Effron were least likely to be in the minority in 3-2 cases, with just one each. This was in the same case (Halpin), where they both were against the Government. (Note that I’m calling Judge Erdmann’s “dissent” in Irizarry a concurrence).

When it came to dissenting, Judge Ryan and Judge Stucky were the most likely to both dissent in the same case, with three (LRM, Caldwell, and Riley). Next was Chief Judge Baker and Judge Cox, who both dissented in two cases (CCR and Wilson). Of the remaining three cases with more than one dissenting judge (Cote, Halpin, and Salyer), there was one each with Chief Judge Baker and Judge Ryan (Cote), Judge Ryan and Senior Judge Cox (Salyer), and Judge Erdmann and Senior Judge Effron (Halpin).

Another interesting statistic is the comparison of who wrote for the court compared with when there were dissents and who dissented. In order of least-dissents to most:

Judge Ryan authored 9 opinions, only 3 of which (33.3%) had dissenters (Gaskins, Bowersox, and Goings). Chief Judge Baker dissented in one case, and Judge Stucky dissented in two cases. Judge Erdmann, Senior Judge Effron, and Senior Judge Cox did not dissent from any opinion authored by Judge Ryan.

Judge Stucky authored 8 opinions, 3 of which (37.5%) had dissenters (CCR, Bennitt, and Halpin). Chief Judge Baker dissented in two cases, and Judge Erdmann, Senior Judge Cox, and Senior Judge Effron each dissented in one case. Judge Ryan did not dissent from any opinion authored by Judge Stucky. (This considers Judge Erdmann’s separate opinion in Irizarry, joined by Chief Judge Baker, as a concurring opinion).

Judge Erdmann also authored 9 opinions, 5 of which (55.5%) had dissenters (Wilson, Cote, Tunstall, Hutchins, and Riley). Chief Judge Baker dissented in four cases, Judge Ryan dissented in two cases, and Judge Stucky and Senior Judge Cox each dissented in one case. Senior Judge Effron did not dissent from any opinion authored by Judge Erdmann.

Chief Judge Baker authored 8 opinions, 5 of which (62.5%) had dissenters (Salyer, Caldwell, Spicer, Capel, and LRM). Judge Stucky and Judge Ryan each dissented in three cases, and Senior Judge Cox dissented in one case. Neither Judge Erdmann nor Senior Judge Effron dissented from any opinion authored by the Chief Judge.

Comments are closed.