Variation in Use of Courts by Legal Status and Jurisdiction

法院经常复制存在的权力差异；更有权势的团体很难在法庭上提出法律主张。这项研究发现已经在多个地点和多个法律领域得到了解决。它没有经过历史的检验，我们也不太了解当弱势群体的成员在当地法院对可能只是略微更有利的人或法律地位不同的人提起诉讼时，这意味着什么。然而，在多个司法管辖区，少数群体的成员利用法院提出索赔和维护利益。最后，在不同类型的法律制度之间的明确比较中，该框架仍未得到充分探讨。该项目将通过比较英美法系和大陆法系的制度，测试法律地位和管辖权在向法院提出索赔方面的重要性。大陆法系司法管辖区组织不同于英美法系的法律主张。将案件告上法庭的人因法律地位不同而不同。这一变化将使该项目能够评估法律地位对提出法律索赔的重要性，无论是在过程中还是在结果中。诉讼表明，法律体系并不是精英阶层的专属领域。将从属群体的成员重新想象为精明的诉讼律师，将使我们对权力的解释复杂化，并将成为理解其他从属群体的法律行动的典范。该项目将生成涉及四个县的黑人诉讼当事人的所有现有下级法院案件的数据集(约2000起案件)，保留脆弱的记录并使其更广泛地可用。存储在法院地下室和储藏室中的未公布的当地法院记录很少被访问，而且正在迅速恶化。这些记录是了解法律制度与分层社会中在法律上被边缘化的人之间的关系的重要资源。该项目还将有助于对学生进行社会科学方面的培训。此外，该项目还将改进本科生关于法律分层和法院使用的教学。

Courts often reproduce existant power differentials; it is difficult to make legal claims in court from more powerful groups. This research finding has been addressed in multiple venues and across multiple areas of law. It has not been tested historically, nor do we know enough about what that means when members of disadvantaged groups take court cases in local courts against people who may only be marginally more advantaged, or may differ in legal status. Yet in multiple jurisdictions, members of minority groups have used the courts to make claims and vindicate interests. Finally, the framework remains underexplored in explicit comparisons across types of legal regimes. This project will test the significance of both legal status and jurisdiction in making claims in the courts, comparing across common-law and civil-law regimes. Civil law jurisdictions organize legal claims making differently from common law systems. People who took cases to court varied by legal status. That variation will allow the project to evaluate the significance of legal status in making legal claims, both in process and outcomes. Litigation indicates that the legal system was not solely the province of the elite. Reimagining members of subordinated groups as shrewd litigators will complicate our interpretation of power and will serve as a model for understanding the legal action of other subordinated groups. This project will generate a dataset of all extant lower court cases involving black litigants in four counties (about 2,000 cases), preserving records that are fragile and making them more broadly available. Unpublished local court records stored in courthouse basements and storage sheds are rarely accessed and rapidly deteriorating. These records represent an important resource for understanding the relationship between legal systems and formally legally marginalized peoples in stratified societies. The project will also contribute to the training of a student in the social sciences. In addition the project will allow improved teaching of undergraduates concerning legal stratification and use of the courts.