Weighted caseload: a critical element of modern court administration

Matthew Kleiman, Richard Y. Schauffler, Brian J. Ostrom, Cynthia G. Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations


In recent years, court systems in the US and abroad have begun to adopt objective, empirically based methods for determining the need for judges. This methodology, called workload assessment or weighted caseload, provides an empirical basis to measure judicial work and assess how many judges are needed to handle the work in a particular jurisdiction, how judicial resources can be equitably allocated, and how much work any particular judge should handle. This article provides a general introduction to the basic elements and applications of the weighted caseload model in both nascent and transitional democracies, outlines the advantages and disadvantages of two alternative methods (Delphi v. time study) for developing case-weighting systems, and summarizes real-world applications in the US and other nations. The article concludes with a set of practical findings regarding the development and implementation of a case-weighting system.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)21-32
Number of pages12
JournalInternational Journal of the Legal Profession
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 2 2019

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Strategy and Management
  • Law


Dive into the research topics of 'Weighted caseload: a critical element of modern court administration'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this