Reverse bifurcation is a trial procedure in which the jury determines damages first, before determining liability. The liability phase of the trial rarely occurs, because the parties usually settle once they know the value of the case. This procedure is already being used in thousands of cases – nearly all the asbestos and Fen-phen cases – but this is the first academic article devoted to the subject. This article explains the history of the procedure and analyzes why it encourages settlements, simplifies jury instructions, and produces better outcomes for the parties
Published in cooperation with the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolutio
By protecting the right to a jury, the state and federal constitutions recognize the fundamental val...
We experimentally study the effects of the split-award tort reform, where the state takes a share of...
Despite its widespread and long-standing recognition as a valuable docket-control device, the bifurc...
In settling a lawsuit, parties agree on their obligations to one another, but they need not separate...
The bifurcation of issues in a federal trial under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(b) offers many...
The Federal District Court for the Northern District of Illinois recently adopted a rule providing f...
Published in cooperation with the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolutio
This article will analyze the types of changes that are taking place by examining three expanding ar...
The ability of juries to resolve malpractice suits was studied. Results showed that most of the time...
Over a decade ago, the Federal Judicial Conference warned of an asbestos litigation “disaster of maj...
This paper extends the economic literature on settlement and draws some practical insights on revers...
We analyze when and why trials can emerge in equilibrium when a defendant may face future plaintiffs...
The allocation of trial costs and the way a trial progresses are two important issues in civil proce...
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a) allows trial courts to grant new trials to any or all of the p...
Published in cooperation with the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolutio
By protecting the right to a jury, the state and federal constitutions recognize the fundamental val...
We experimentally study the effects of the split-award tort reform, where the state takes a share of...
Despite its widespread and long-standing recognition as a valuable docket-control device, the bifurc...
In settling a lawsuit, parties agree on their obligations to one another, but they need not separate...
The bifurcation of issues in a federal trial under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(b) offers many...
The Federal District Court for the Northern District of Illinois recently adopted a rule providing f...
Published in cooperation with the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolutio
This article will analyze the types of changes that are taking place by examining three expanding ar...
The ability of juries to resolve malpractice suits was studied. Results showed that most of the time...
Over a decade ago, the Federal Judicial Conference warned of an asbestos litigation “disaster of maj...
This paper extends the economic literature on settlement and draws some practical insights on revers...
We analyze when and why trials can emerge in equilibrium when a defendant may face future plaintiffs...
The allocation of trial costs and the way a trial progresses are two important issues in civil proce...
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a) allows trial courts to grant new trials to any or all of the p...
Published in cooperation with the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolutio
By protecting the right to a jury, the state and federal constitutions recognize the fundamental val...
We experimentally study the effects of the split-award tort reform, where the state takes a share of...