Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 103-105). Also available on the Internet.

Virtually every child welfare system has been harshly criticized for the way it treats abused and neglected children. The system has been so problematic for some states that lawsuits have been filed against them. To remedy these problems, system-wide policy reform has received a good deal of attention, but this approach lacks the empirical research needed to move the field forward to better serve children and families. This study answers the question: Does child welfare reform via litigation produce long-term effects on child outcomes and state child welfare budgets after the case is closed? The study employed mixed research methods. The qualitative portion relies on case studies of four states that were developed through a series of in-depth interviews and an extensive historical document analysis. For each state, the study examined 1) the association between litigation and state funding for child welfare systems, 2) examined the relationship between litigation and child outcomes over time, and 3) studied key stakeholders’ perceptions of litigation’s impact on budget and child outcomes. The quantitative portion of the study utilized outcome data that are available for all 50 states to compare states that have undergone comprehensive class action litigation with those that have not. Case studies of 4 states (Alabama, Kansas, New Mexico, Utah) included a qualitative analysis and five major themes emerged: leadership, policy interventions (e.g. budget, data monitoring, legislation), direct interventions (e.g. caseload decreases, trainings, etc.) , settlement agreement characteristics and litigation’s value as a method of reform. A method called Qualitative Comparative Analysis was used to identify themes and subthemes identified from the qualitative analysis that play instrumental roles in impacting outcomes. Findings indicate that litigation appears to positively impact child welfare systems functioning during the lawsuit, but it is difficult to see how these systems changes impact outcomes. Many reforms are difficult to sustain due to their reliance on increased budgets which decline post litigation. Reform is also reliant on supportive leadership, which is subject to frequent turnover. Study participants viewed litigation as effective at garnering attention for problems in the child welfare system, but at a very high cost (e.g. financial, length of time, adversarial environment, etc.). Decreased caseload, increased budget, and effective data collection systems were found to be instrumental in positively impacting outcomes. A faster, less costly and less adversarial method of reform is needed. / text

Trial advocacy is an important aspect of our legal system, and is critical for ensuring a fair trial. This dissertation considers the recommended trial advocacy techniques for attorney demeanor, verbal communications, paralinguistic communications, kinesic communication, attorney-client relationships, and storytelling in light of the available science. First, each chapter reviews the trial strategies recommended by trial commentators. Next, each chapter explores scientific research relevant to the advocacy recommendations by legal commentators and identifies the limitations in their recommendations. In addition, research-based advocacy techniques are suggested for improving trial advocacy.

No description available.

No description available.

This dissertation analyzes court cases involving tort claims filed against Mississippi public schools and their employees under the Mississippi Tort Claims Act. The question addressed was: How have the Mississippi courts interpreted the Mississippi Tort Claims Act in litigation against Mississippi school districts and their employees? The intent of this dissertation is to add to the understanding of the legal concept of sovereign immunity as it has been applied to public schools and their employees. This study's focus centers on litigation in the state of Mississippi involving school districts. Chapter 2 provides a historical summary of sovereign immunity (also known as governmental immunity) in the United States and the state of Mississippi up to the enactment of the Mississippi Tort Claims Act as well as an overview of general legal concepts involved in tort claims. Chapter 3 explains the research design and methodology used. This dissertation relied on legal principles of research and document analysis used in the legal profession. Chapter 4 consists of a thorough analysis of published case law brought before the Mississippi courts pertaining to the Mississippi Tort Claims Act and public school systems and their employees. Finally, chapter 5 describes the key findings of the analysis of case law involving Mississippi school districts and their employees under the Mississippi Tort Claims Act.

This thesis document was issued under the authority of another institution, not NPS. At the time it was written, a copy was added to the NPS Library Collection for reasons not now known. It has been included in the digital archive for its historical value to NPS. Not believed to be a CIVINS (Civilian Institutions) title. / This thesis analyzes cases of construction litigation involving the U.S. Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) for the period 1982-2003. NAVFAC construction litagation cases were extracted from the historical trail decision record of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA). The thesis provides trend data for all "first time" construction litigation cases brought before the board over the last 21 years. A total of 666 cases involving NAVFAC construction contracts were identified over this 21 year period. The characterization of these cases was accomplished through a review and tabulation of ASBCA identified primary causes and a subjective analysis of "root" causes from a random sample extracted from the total population. The random sample data set totals 30 cases and was taken from cases litigated in the last 10 years. Recommendation based on the findings are given to NAVFAC.

No description available.

Cognitive ability testing is utilized by many organizations in the selection process. Historically, cognitive ability testing has resulted in group differences in scores, particularly between Caucasians and African-Americans. Such group differences can result in adverse impact. This impact can lead to legal ramifications for the organization utilizing the cognitive ability test. The present study examined ten factors to determine their relationship to the findings of the courts in cases involving cognitive ability tests. The factors examined were gender of the plaintiff, reason for the lawsuit, workplace setting, group or individual plaintiffs, standardadized versus unstandardized tests, validation of the tests, development in-house or by a consultant, other test involvement, jury versus summary judgment, and the verdict of the court. As hypothesized, courts tend to rule in favor of defendants when the cognitive ability test in question has been properly validated. The majority of the plaintiffs were members of a minority group, and the number of race-based discrimination court cases was significantly greater than the number of gender-based discrimination court cases. Only one court case was included in the study that had utilized a jury; no determination of jury versus judge rulings could be made.

No description available.