This paper develops implications of the selection hypothesis of George L. Priest and Benjamin Klein (1984) for the relationship between trial rates and plaintiff win rates. The author finds strong evidence for the selection hypothesis in estimated relationships between trial rates and plaintiff win rates at trial across case types and judges. He then structurally estimates the model on judge data, yielding estimates of the model's major parameters (the decision standard, the degree of stake asymmetry, and the uncertainty parameter) for each of three major case types, contracts, property rights, and torts. Copyright 1995 by University of Chicago Press.
Parties engaged in a litigation generally enter the discovery process with different informations re...
Legal cases that reach trial are a biased subset of underlying disputes. This makes it difficult to ...
General Observations on Interpreting Win-Rate Data Properly. Many empirical legal studies use data o...
The selection hypothesis of Priest and Klein explains the selection of cases for trial, from the und...
Priest and Klein argued in 1984 that, because of selection effects, the percentage of litigated case...
Recent law and economics scholarship has produced much theoretical and empirical work on how and why...
This chapter presents a review of trial selection theory. We use the term “trial selection theory” t...
In this paper I introduce what I call the reduced form approach to studying the plaintiff\u27s win r...
The Priest/Klein model predicts both trial rates and plaintiff win rates as functions of three struc...
The process through which cases are selected for litigation cannot be ignored because it yields a se...
In their 1984 article, Priest and Klein show that a simple divergent expectations model of the decis...
The Priest-Klein model predicts that a decline in the plaintiff win rate might be explained by a cha...
Parties engaged in a litigation generally enter the discovery process with different informations re...
Legal cases that reach trial are a biased subset of underlying disputes. This makes it difficult to ...
General Observations on Interpreting Win-Rate Data Properly. Many empirical legal studies use data o...
The selection hypothesis of Priest and Klein explains the selection of cases for trial, from the und...
Priest and Klein argued in 1984 that, because of selection effects, the percentage of litigated case...
Recent law and economics scholarship has produced much theoretical and empirical work on how and why...
This chapter presents a review of trial selection theory. We use the term “trial selection theory” t...
In this paper I introduce what I call the reduced form approach to studying the plaintiff\u27s win r...
The Priest/Klein model predicts both trial rates and plaintiff win rates as functions of three struc...
The process through which cases are selected for litigation cannot be ignored because it yields a se...
In their 1984 article, Priest and Klein show that a simple divergent expectations model of the decis...
The Priest-Klein model predicts that a decline in the plaintiff win rate might be explained by a cha...
Parties engaged in a litigation generally enter the discovery process with different informations re...
Legal cases that reach trial are a biased subset of underlying disputes. This makes it difficult to ...
General Observations on Interpreting Win-Rate Data Properly. Many empirical legal studies use data o...