Showing 1 - 10 of 34
This paper attempts to shed light on some factors determining the duration of disputes. To this aim a unique database is used, accounting for eight hundred judgments rendered by the Italian Regional Administrative Courts from 2000 to 2007. Our findings confirm that normative complexity hampers a...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010903220
Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker acknowledged that empirical studies undercut criticism of punitive damages. Paradoxically, the Court simultaneously expressed concern about jury predictability based on a high and variable punitive-compensatory ratio published in an article by the present authors. The...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010625801
Corporate actors differ from individuals in that it may be possible to observe the formation of the corporate will from outside, and to influence its formation. This feature can be exploited by regulators. One technique is inducing corporate actors to hire an interface actor, representing the...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005241795
We study how the presence of biased expertise influences judicial decision-making. When an appeals-court judge's decision depends only on the information he gets about the expertise proceedings, a perfectly separating equilibrium may arise in which the losing litigant appeals only if the...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010903219
We present a model of recent institutional developments in litigation funding across several European jurisdictions. They combine contingency fees with third party cover for cost in the event of losing the case: we call these "Third Party Contingency" (TPC) contracts. A TPC contract can make...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005241778
Do specialized judges make better decisions than judges who are generalists? Specialized judges surely come to know their area of law well, but specialization might also allow judges to develop better, more reliable ways of assessing cases. We assessed this question by presenting a group of...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005241824
Witnesses often gain by slanting testimony. Courts try to elicit the truth with perjury rules. Perjury is not truth-revealing; truth revelation is, however, possible. With a truth-revealing mechanism the judge will get little testimony because the defendant will not present witnesses with...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005823407
There is extensive literature on whether courts or legislators produce efficient rules, but which of them produces rules efficiently? The law is subject touncertainty ex ante; uncertainty makes the outcomes of trials difficult to predict and deters parties from settling disputes out of court. In...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005823412
We claim that Posner's nuisance rule maintains the efficiency feature even under severe informational asymmetry. This paper, as a critical assessment of an overly complicated order-reporting mechanism by Kim [2002], argues that Posner's original value-reporting mechanism alone is enough to...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005764325
In trials witnesses often slant their testimony in order to advance their own interests. To obtain truthful testimony, the law relies on cross-examination under threat of prosecution for perjury. We show that perjury law is an imperfect truthrevealing mechanism. Moreover, we develop a...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005764347