HAMILTON COUNTY JUDGES
Hamilton County judges try thousands of cases per year. In an overwhelming majority of
the cases disposed, the verdict stands as rendered. However, some cases are
appealed, and of those appealed, some of the cases are reversed. Kristen DelGuzzi of
the Cincinnati Enquirer conducted a study of cases handled by Hamilton County judges
over a three-year period (Cincinnati Enquirer, January 11, 1998). Shown in the following
table are the results for 182,908 cases handled (disposed) by 38 judges in Common
Pleas Court, Domestic Relations Court, and Municipal Court. Two of the judges
(Dinkelacker and Hogan) did not serve in the same court for the entire three-year
period.
The purpose of the newspaper’s study was to evaluate the performance of the
judges. Appeals are often the result of mistakes made by judges, and the newspaper
wanted to know which judges were doing a good job and which were making too many
mistakes. You have been called in to assists in the data analysis. Use your knowledge
of probability and conditional probability to help with the ranking with the judges. You
also may be able to analyze the likelihood of cases handled by the different courts being
appealed and reversed.
Table 1. CASES DISPOSED, APPEALED, AND REVERSED IN HAMILTON COUNTY
COURTS
Common Pleas Court
Total Cases Appealed Cases Reversed Cases
Judge Disposed
Fred Cartolano 3037 137 12
Thomas Crush 3372 119 10
Patrick Dinkelacker 1258 44 8
Timothy Hogan 1954 60 7
Robert Kraft 3138 127 7
William Mathews 2264 91 18
William Morrissey 3032 121 22
Norbert Nadel 2959 131 20
Arthur Ney, Jr. 3219 125 14
Richard Niehaus 3353 137 16
Thomas Nurre 3000 121 6
John O’ Connor 2969 129 12
Robert Ruehlman 3205 145 18
J. Howard Sundermann 955 60 10
Ann Marie Tracey 3141 127 13
Ralph Winkler 3089 88 6
Total 43,945 1762 199
Domestic Relations Court
Total Cases Appealed Cases Reversed Cases
Judge Disposed
Penelope Cunningham 2729 7 1
Patrick Dinkelacker 6001 19 4
Deborah Gaines 8799 48 9
Ronald Panioto 12,970 32 3
Total 30,499 106 17
Municipal Court
Total Cases Appealed Cases Reversed Cases
Judge Disposed
Mike Allen 6149 43 4
Nadine Allen 7812 34 6
Timothy Black 7954 41 6
David Davis 7736 43 5
Leslie Isaiah Gaines 5282 35 13
Karla Grady 5253 6 0
Deidra Hair 2532 5 0
Dennis Helmick 7900 29 5
Timothy Hogan 2308 13 2
James Patrick Kenney 2798 6 1
Joseph Luebbers 4698 25 8
William Mallory 8277 38 9
Melba Marsh 8219 34 7
Beth Mattingly 2971 13 1
Albert Mestemaker 4975 28 9
Mark Painter 2239 7 3
Jack Rosen 7790 41 13
Mark Schweikert 5403 33 6
David Stockdale 5371 22 4
John A. West 2797 4 2
Total 108,464 500 104
Managerial Report
Prepare a report with your rankings of the judges. Also, include an analysis of the
likelihood of appeal and case reversal in the three courts. At a minimum, your report
should include the following:
1. The probability of cases being appealed and reversed in the three different courts
P（Common Pleas Court - appealed .) = 1162/43945 = 4.01%
P（Common Pleas Court - Reversed.) = 119/43945 = 0.45%
P（Domestic Relations Court - appealed .) = 106/30499= 0.35%
P（Domestic Relations Court - Reversed.) = 17/30499= 0.06%
P（Municipal Court - appealed .) = 500/108464= 0.46%
P（Municipal Court - Reversed.) = 104/108464= 0.1%
2. The probability of a case being appealed for each judge.
P（each judge - appealed .) = each appealed /total case =
3. The probability of a case being reversed for each judge.
P（each judge - Reversed.) = each Reversed/total case =
4. The probability of reversal given an appeal for each judge.
P（each judge - Reversed/appeal ) = each Reversed/each appealed =
5. Rank the judges within each court. State the criteria you used and provide a
rationale for your choice.
