# Jackson County

Jackson 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. Jackie Chan of The Star Tribune conducted a study of cases handled by Jackson County judges over a three-year period. In the attached Excel file Judges are the results for the 182,908 cases handled (disposed) by 40 judges in Common Pleas Court, Domestic Relations Court, and Municipal Court.
The purpose of the newspaper's study was to evaluate the performance of the judges. The newspaper wanted to know which judges were doing a good job and which ones were making too many mistakes. You are to assist in the data analysis by using your knowledge of probability and conditional probability to help with the ranking of the judges as well as each court.
Managerial Report
Prepare a report (see below) with your ranking of the judges based on the probabilities and conditional probabilities as well as the analysis of each court. Include the following seven (7) items in table format to support your ranking. Be sure to use five (5) decimal places for your probabilities in the table as some of them will be quite small.
1. The probability of cases being appealed in each of the three different courts.
2. The probability of cases being reversed in each of the three different courts.
3. The probability of cases being reversed given an appeal in each of the three different courts.
4. The probability of a case being appealed for each judge.
5. The probability of a case being reversed for each judge.
6. The probability of reversal given an appeal for each judge.
7. Rank the judges within each court for each of the probabilities in 4 - 6. Then find the sum of the ranks and get an overall ranking for each judge.

Data is as follows:
Court Judge Disposed Appealed Reversed P(Appeal) Rank by P(A) P(Reversal) Rank by P(R) P(R|A) Rank by P(R|A) Sum of Ranks Overall Rank
Common Pleas Peter Tom 2711 143 11
Angela M. Mazzarelli 2560 112 15
Richard T. Andrias 1567 42 2
David Friedman 1989 23 4
John W. Sweeny Jr. 3120 166 6
Rolando T. Acosta 2761 154 19
David B. Saxe 3216 132 7
Karla Moskowitz 3354 167 11
Dianne T. Renwick 2995 100 21
Leland G. DeGrasse 2906 53 7
Helen E. Freedman 2701 131 9
Rosalyn H. Richter 2356 65 7
Sallie Manzanet-Daniels 3225 142 8
Paul G. Feinman 2422 83 37
Judith J. Gische 2942 155 26
Darcel D. Clark 3120 94 9
Total

Domestic Relations John A. Lahtinen 4310 6 1
Leslie E. Stein 9682 43 7
William E. McCarthy 7356 18 6
Edward O. Spain 9151 39 3
Total

Municipal Elizabeth A. Garry 4534 23 4
John C. Egan Jr. 7895 65 7
Peter Tom 4687 23 4
Angela M. Mazzarelli 12464 1 0
Richard T. Andrias 9062 32 32
David Friedman 6753 5 3
John W. Sweeny Jr. 2374 78 1
Rolando T. Acosta 6746 12 4
David B. Saxe 2232 54 7
Karla Moskowitz 2536 21 4
Dianne T. Renwick 4527 12 6
Leland G. DeGrasse 6742 8 8
Helen E. Freedman 6437 54 2
Rosalyn H. Richter 2890 21 1
Sallie Manzanet-Daniels 4836 14 4
Paul G. Feinman 1507 2 1
Judith J. Gische 7832 10 2
Darcel D. Clark 6521 34 5
Luis A. Gonzalez 5021 27 5
Leslie E. Stein 2868 4 4
Total

A body of the paper that answers the questions posed in the problem and calculations and graphs associated with this problem.

A conclusion paragraph that addresses your findings and what you have determined from the data and your analysis.