In a 1991 paper, Polinsky and Che argue that lowering plaintiffs’ recovery and raising defendants’ damages can deliver the same level of deterrence with fewer filed suits. A subsequent paper by Kahan and Tuckman provisionally corroborates Polinsky and Che’s analysis in an extended model that accounts for the effect of litigation states on litigation effort levels. In contrast, we show that when litigation effort is endogenous, Polinsky and Che’s proposal to lower recovery and raise damages may no longer improve social welfare. We then characterize the kinds of suits where it is in fact suboptimal to set recovery below damages. Of significance for the current policy debate, we find that such suits share many of the empirical premises about l...
Victims want to collect damages from injurers. Cases differ with re-spect to the judgment. Attorneys...
In this article, we ask the basic question: Is it necessarily the case that allowing or promoting se...
revision of an earlier paper titled “Welfare Implications of Strict Liability with Costly Litigation...
Professors Polinsky and Che advocate "decoupling" what plaintiffs recover from what defendants pay i...
Recent years have seen a debate over litigation reform grow increasingly agitated. Attorneys, judges...
A "decoupled " liability system is one in which the award to the plaintiff differs from th...
When plaintiffs cannot predict the outcome of litigation with certainty, neither the American rule (...
Conventional understanding in legal reform communities is that time and resources are best directed ...
The private value of lawsuits is based on plaintiffs ’ expected recovery at trial compared to their ...
This paper considers settlement negotiations between a single defendant and N plaintiffs when there ...
We show that, when plaintiffs cannot predict the outcome of litigation with certainty, neither the A...
This article examines a model of strict liability with costly litigation and presents conditions und...
The private value of lawsuits is based on plaintiffs\u27 expected recovery at trial compared to thei...
Study of two comprehensive class action case data sets covering 1993-2002 shows that the amount of c...
This paper considers settlement negotiations between a single defendant and $N$ plaintiffs when ther...
Victims want to collect damages from injurers. Cases differ with re-spect to the judgment. Attorneys...
In this article, we ask the basic question: Is it necessarily the case that allowing or promoting se...
revision of an earlier paper titled “Welfare Implications of Strict Liability with Costly Litigation...
Professors Polinsky and Che advocate "decoupling" what plaintiffs recover from what defendants pay i...
Recent years have seen a debate over litigation reform grow increasingly agitated. Attorneys, judges...
A "decoupled " liability system is one in which the award to the plaintiff differs from th...
When plaintiffs cannot predict the outcome of litigation with certainty, neither the American rule (...
Conventional understanding in legal reform communities is that time and resources are best directed ...
The private value of lawsuits is based on plaintiffs ’ expected recovery at trial compared to their ...
This paper considers settlement negotiations between a single defendant and N plaintiffs when there ...
We show that, when plaintiffs cannot predict the outcome of litigation with certainty, neither the A...
This article examines a model of strict liability with costly litigation and presents conditions und...
The private value of lawsuits is based on plaintiffs\u27 expected recovery at trial compared to thei...
Study of two comprehensive class action case data sets covering 1993-2002 shows that the amount of c...
This paper considers settlement negotiations between a single defendant and $N$ plaintiffs when ther...
Victims want to collect damages from injurers. Cases differ with re-spect to the judgment. Attorneys...
In this article, we ask the basic question: Is it necessarily the case that allowing or promoting se...
revision of an earlier paper titled “Welfare Implications of Strict Liability with Costly Litigation...