Showing 1 - 10 of 113
expected payoffs, but by much less than is predicted by theory. Dispute rates across the two games are approximately equal …
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014173918
We extend the signaling model of Reinganum and Wilde (1986) by allowing for the possibility of negative expected value (NEV) suits. If filing costs are positive, then there exists a separating equilibrium such that plaintiffs with NEV suits choose not to file. By making the filing decision...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014113668
We develop screening models of final offer arbitration (FOA) in which the uninformed party makes a demand to the informed party. We consider models in which settlement occurs before and after the submission of binding offers, and in each we analyze costly discovery. Our results are compared to...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012833468
We develop a model with asymmetric information, where the uninformed party makes the offer. When parties proceed to trial, their endogenous expenditures partially determine the outcome. The endogenous spending at trial can either strengthen or weaken the bargaining position of the uninformed...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014167140
We analyze contingency fees in the Reinganum and Wilde (1986) signaling model of litigation. The effect of contingency fees on settlement depends upon the details of the contingency fee contract and the nature of the informational asymmetry assumed in the model. Introducing bifurcated fee...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014127695
We extend the 1986 signaling model of Reinganum and Wilde by allowing for the possibility of negative expected value (NEV) suits. If filing costs are zero, the equilibrium consistent with the D1 refinement implies that settlement offers face a rejection rate of 100%. If filing costs are...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005738791
We analyze contingency fees in the Reinganum and Wilde (1986) signaling model of litigation. The effect of contingency fees on settlement depends on the details of the contingency fee contract and the nature of the informational asymmetry assumed in the model. Introducing bifurcated fee...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005562246
Asymmetric information is a leading explanation for settlement failure that results in a costly trial. Typically, the information in question is assumed to have bilateral payoff relevance, meaning it affects the expected payoffs of both the plaintiff and defendant. When there is bilateral payoff...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10009421447
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10008735726
We develop a model with asymmetric information, where the uninformed party makes the offer. When parties proceed to trial, their endogenous expenditures partially determine the outcome. The endogenous spending at trial can either strengthen or weaken the bargaining position of the uninformed...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014191996