Juris Science Doctor (JSD), Cornell University

Resumen: High Courts have been found to be more active and ideological than lower courts. Nevertheless, they often face chronic case overload and have to devise ways to optimize their processes. In this paper we study one such way, the introduction of appeals dismissals upon failure to comply with formal requirements by the Argentine Supreme Court. We show that this dismissal source especially affects certain type of appeals. Specifically, Labor Law appeals are particularly affected by the new requirements, being three times more likely to be dismissed on formal grounds than other appeals. In addition, we show that ideological considerations may compensate party capability differences in some areas of law. Case in point, Criminal Law appeals are 40 percent less likely to be dismissed on formal grounds than the mean appeal. Furthermore, Criminal Law appeals dismissed on formal error grounds are more than 3 times as likely to carry a separate or dissident opinion as the mean appeal. Finally, we present some evidence suggesting that the incorporation of the new dismissal grounds has not been sufficient to obtain efficient case duration nor to increase the Argentine Supreme Court’s output.

El seminario se dictará en idioma castellano.