Irwin W. Stolz Jr.: case analysis
Court of Appeals of Georgia · 0 linked cases · Insufficient data · Computed Oct 10, 2026
- Cases analyzed
- 0
- Insufficient data
- Median days to close
- Insufficient data
- 0 closed cases
- Plaintiff win rate
- Insufficient data
- 0 civil judgments
- Lean
- Not computed
- Needs 100+ civil judgments
Lean from past civil judgments
Compares how often plaintiffs won before this judge with other judges in the same court. A pattern, not a prediction.
Insufficient data. A lean needs at least 100 sourced civil judgments for this judge and 3 other judges in the court with 30 or more each. This record has 0.
How civil cases ended
Only results stated in a source document count. Cases still open or closed without a stated result are left out.
Insufficient data. Civil judgment direction needs at least 30 sourced records; this record has 0.
- Plaintiff win rate
- Insufficient data
- 0 judgments for one side
- Dismissal rate
- Insufficient data
- 0 dismissed of 0 with a stated result
Jury or judge decided
Trials the source describes as jury or bench trials.
Insufficient data. Trial type needs at least 30 sourced records; this record has 0.
- Share of trials before a jury
- Insufficient data
- 0 trials
- Jury demanded on the docket
- Insufficient data
- 0 of 0 dockets with the flag. A demand is not a trial.
Criminal cases
Pleas, convictions and acquittals as the source records them.
Insufficient data. Criminal outcomes needs at least 30 sourced records; this record has 0.
Appeals and panel votes
Votes on published appellate opinions, and how appeals this judge decided came out.
No published panel votes or appellate results are linked to this judge.
Time from filing to closing
Days between the filing date and the closing date on the docket. The dark mark is the median; the band covers the middle half of cases.
Insufficient data. Time to disposition needs at least 30 sourced records; this record has 0.
Judges sat with most
Judges recorded on the same published opinions.
No shared opinions are linked to this judge.
Law firms that appear most
Firms whose attorneys are listed on this judge's cases, with the side they represented. An appearance is not an endorsement.
No attorney appearances with a firm are linked to this judge yet.
Courts worked in
Courts of the cases linked to this judge.
No court links are recorded.
Career
Positions in the source records.
- Court of Appeals of GeorgiaApr 3, 1972 – present or not recorded
How these figures are calculated
Read the methodology
Computed nightly from the cases linked to this judge in the JudgeFinder record (CourtListener docket metadata and court sources), sourced case outcomes, published opinions and panel votes.
Every figure carries its sample size. Confidence tiers: insufficient (fewer than 30), low (30–99), medium (100–499), high (500 or more). Below the minimum a rate is not shown and the page says "Insufficient data".
Outcomes: civil judgment direction and dismissals count only outcomes stated in a source document. Plaintiff win rate = judgments for plaintiff ÷ judgments for plaintiff or defendant (split and no-judgment results excluded). Dismissal rate = civil dispositions that say "dismissed" ÷ civil cases with any stated disposition.
Jury vs bench counts trials the source describes as jury or bench trials. Jury demand is the docket flag, which is a request, not a trial.
Criminal: guilty pleas, trial convictions and acquittals as the source states them. Trial conviction rate = convictions ÷ (convictions + acquittals).
Appellate: authored, joined, concurring and dissenting votes from published opinions. Affirm and reverse rates are shares of decided appeals this judge sat on. Reversal of this judge's own trial rulings is not reported until the record links appeals to the cases below.
Lean compares this judge's civil plaintiff win rate with the median of other judges in the same court. It needs at least 100 civil judgments and 3 other judges with 30+ each. A direction is shown only when the gap is at least 10 points and the 95% Wilson interval for the judge's rate excludes the court median; otherwise the label is "no clear lean". The basis sentence states both rates and the sample.
Time to disposition: days from filing to closing on the docket, excluding miscellaneous, warrant, petty-offense and magistrate-miscellaneous dockets. Median and 25th/75th percentiles.
Judges sat with most: judges who voted on the same published opinions. Law firms: firms whose attorneys appear on the docket, with the side they represented.