Showing 1 - 10 of 15
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10003713133
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10003328122
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10003952380
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10003498654
This paper analyzes the incentive properties of the standard and burden of proof for a finding of negligence, when evidence is imperfect and rests with the parties. We show that the preponderance of evidence' standard provides maximal incentives to exert care. This holds even though litigants...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011409967
This paper analyzes the incentive properties of the standard and burden of proof for a finding of negligence, when evidence is imperfect and rests with the parties. We show that the "preponderance of evidence" standard provides maximal incentives to exert care. This holds even though litigants...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10001689146
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10001432196
We conduct an experiment where participants choose between actions that provide private benefits but may also impose losses on strangers. Three legal environments are compared: no law, strict liability for the harm caused to others, and an efficiently designed negligence rule where damages are...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012919769
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010210117
This paper analyzes the incentive properties of the standard and burden of proof for a finding of negligence, when evidence is imperfect and rests with the parties. We show that the "preponderance of evidence" standard provides maximal incentives to exert care. This holds even though litigants...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10013320509