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 Excel file, Judges, linked at the bottom of the page, 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 each 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.

The probability of cases being appealed in each of the three different courts.

The probability of cases being reversed in each of the three different courts.

The probability of cases being reversed given an appeal in each of the three different courts.

The probability of a case being appealed for each judge.

The probability of a case being reversed for each judge.

The probability of reversal, given an appeal for each judge.

Rank the judges within each court for each of the probabilities in 4 – 6. In other words, only rank the judges in the Common Pleas court against the other judges in the Common Pleas court. perfrom the same analysis for the other two courts. Then, within each court, find the sum of the ranks and get an overall ranking for each judge. Evaluate and discuss the meaning of your results. Use tables, charts, graphs, or visual dashboards to support your findings.

Your report must contain the following:

A title page in APA style.

An introduction that summarizes the problem.

The body of the paper should answer the questions posed in the problem by communicating the results of your analysis. Include results of calculations, as well as charts and graphs, where appropriate.

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

Submit your Excel file in addition to your report.

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	3252	211	9
	Angela M. Mazzarelli	4523	23	5
	Richard T. Andrias	5231	61	8
	David Friedman	3215	33	4
	John W. Sweeny Jr.	3452	145	2
	Rolando T. Acosta	3431	64	8
	David B. Saxe	1236	46	3
	Karla Moskowitz	3211	74	5
	Dianne T. Renwick	1257	123	2
	Leland G. DeGrasse	1537	53	7
	Helen E. Freedman	1054	216	3
	Rosalyn H. Richter	2176	36	22
	Sallie Manzanet-Daniels	1567	43	31
	Paul G. Feinman	2164	262	53
	Judith J. Gische	2686	197	12
	Darcel D. Clark	3953	175	25
	Total
Domestic Relations	John A. Lahtinen	8362	43	3
	Leslie E. Stein	6572	21	6
	William E. McCarthy	9321	8	3
	Edward O. Spain	6244	34	5
	Total
Municipal	Elizabeth A. Garry	3542	31	6
	John C. Egan Jr.	3285	23	34
	Peter Tom	8757	38	7
	Angela M. Mazzarelli	3463	7	3
	Richard T. Andrias	7424	45	1
	David Friedman	9345	32	3
	John W. Sweeny Jr.	7533	84	5
	Rolando T. Acosta	5764	43	7
	David B. Saxe	5822	3	3
	Karla Moskowitz	3631	7	5
	Dianne T. Renwick	5645	5	0
	Leland G. DeGrasse	6434	34	3
	Helen E. Freedman	3453	8	2
	Rosalyn H. Richter	3521	45	6
	Sallie Manzanet-Daniels	6757	52	7
	Paul G. Feinman	1273	4	3
	Judith J. Gische	6753	9	1
	Darcel D. Clark	9825	6	3
	Luis A. Gonzalez	3421	12	2
	Leslie E. Stein	2816	12	3
	Total