Justice Good as Random?

Abstract

The random assignment of judges promotes fairness and underpins causal identification across the social sciences. Analyzing Chapter 11 bankruptcies, we find sophisticated parties “judge‐shop”: relative to secured hedge fund creditors, cases involving unsecured hedge fund creditors and equity holders are assigned judges with lower past conversion rates and higher unsecured recovery rates. Experienced legal counsel similarly influences assignment. Because judges are not assigned consecutive large cases, knowledgeable parties can judge‐shop by timing the filing date. We develop a method to measure the resulting bias and demonstrate the need for controls and bounded instrumental variable specifications in judge/examiner designs.