1. Resource Inequalities and Litigation Outcomes in the Philippine Supreme Court Stacia L. Haynie 報告人：黃適文 1 20100324

2. The goal of this paper The author argues that the court in unindustrialized countries wishes to preserve its legitimacy. Therefore, instead of favoring the “have”, the court must balance the interest of the “have nots” 2

3. Why Philippine? The Philippine Supreme Court’s docket, unlike its American counterpart, contains many routine decisions The Philippine Supreme Court decides four to five times as many decisions as the US Supreme Court, from 500 to 700 cases or more per term year 3

4. Why Philippine? A longitudinal analysis over a 26-year period that the results do not reflect idiosyncratic conditions The justices appointed to the bench are aware of the plight of the poor (qualitative research) 4

5. Model 5

6. 6

7. Analysis and findings The coefficient for legal forum is significant Cases involving creditor/debtor, landlord/tenant, labor/management, and workers’ compensation disputes significantly increase the likelihood of success for the petitioner 7

8. Analysis and findings Superior legal rights significant increase the likelihood of the petitioner losing Big winner is the individual, the likelihood of success is positive and significant if the petitioner is the individual 8

9. 9

10. 10

11. 11

12. 12

13. 13

14. 14

15. Issue advantage comparison Individual do better than corporations in 4 of 6 categories, better than the government in 3 of 6 categories significantly different than the findings for the US or the British Court of Appeal 15

16. Longitudinal analysis During the Marcos years, and especially during the martial law period the Philippine Supreme Court’s reputation suffered 16

17. 17

18. Regression equation 18

19. 19

20. 20

21. Conclusion The appellate law can serve a redistributive function for society that can potentially enhance its legitimacy as a political institution. To enhance the stability of the court in society, decisions are rendered that favor with less, and this likelihood increases as the Court’s legitimacy is threatened. 21