This article addresses tort reform claims made in Cass R. Sunstein, et al.\u27s Punitive Damages: How Juries Decide (2002)and related articles, research that was largely underwritten by the Exxon Corporation. Based upon a series of simulation experiments, those authors have made a general claim that juries are incapable of making coherent judgments about punitive damages. In this article I raise serious methodological problems bearing on the validity of the research, and, therefore, its ability to provide judges and legislators with useful information about juries and punitive damages
Evidence of corporate risk-cost balancing often leads to inefficient punitive damages awards, sugges...
Fueled by anecdotal instances of extremely large damage awards, there has been significant public co...
Are juries rational or irrational? In the context of punitive damage awards, jury decisions suffer f...
This article addresses tort reform claims made in Cass R. Sunstein, et al.\u27s Punitive Damages: Ho...
Punitive damages have prompted much academic and political debate during the last twenty years. In t...
Proposals to provide juries with specific numerical instructions for setting punitive damages should...
In response to concerns that jury awards in tort cases are excessive and unpredictable, nearly every...
In their recent Arizona Law Review article entitled What Juries Can\u27t Do Well: The Jury\u27s Perf...
Juries in most American jurisdictions can inflict punitive damages awards against tortfeasors who ha...
Experimental evidence generated in controlled laboratory studies suggests that the legal system in g...
In this Article, we argue that current debates on the legitimacy of punitive damages would benefit f...
This paper presents the first empirical anatysis that demonstrates that juries differ from judges in...
This essay reports and discusses the implications of an experimental study involving punitive damage...
We analyze thousands of trials from a substantial fraction of the nation\u27s most populous counties...
Empirical studies have consistently shown that punitive damages are rarely awarded, with rates of ab...
Evidence of corporate risk-cost balancing often leads to inefficient punitive damages awards, sugges...
Fueled by anecdotal instances of extremely large damage awards, there has been significant public co...
Are juries rational or irrational? In the context of punitive damage awards, jury decisions suffer f...
This article addresses tort reform claims made in Cass R. Sunstein, et al.\u27s Punitive Damages: Ho...
Punitive damages have prompted much academic and political debate during the last twenty years. In t...
Proposals to provide juries with specific numerical instructions for setting punitive damages should...
In response to concerns that jury awards in tort cases are excessive and unpredictable, nearly every...
In their recent Arizona Law Review article entitled What Juries Can\u27t Do Well: The Jury\u27s Perf...
Juries in most American jurisdictions can inflict punitive damages awards against tortfeasors who ha...
Experimental evidence generated in controlled laboratory studies suggests that the legal system in g...
In this Article, we argue that current debates on the legitimacy of punitive damages would benefit f...
This paper presents the first empirical anatysis that demonstrates that juries differ from judges in...
This essay reports and discusses the implications of an experimental study involving punitive damage...
We analyze thousands of trials from a substantial fraction of the nation\u27s most populous counties...
Empirical studies have consistently shown that punitive damages are rarely awarded, with rates of ab...
Evidence of corporate risk-cost balancing often leads to inefficient punitive damages awards, sugges...
Fueled by anecdotal instances of extremely large damage awards, there has been significant public co...
Are juries rational or irrational? In the context of punitive damage awards, jury decisions suffer f...