Despite the Supreme Court's 2005 decision in United States v. Booker, which enhanced the power of district court judges to sentence defendants below the range prescribed by the federal sentencing guidelines, the great majority of federal sentences continue to follow the guidelines'...

Professor Martha C. Nussbaum is an accomplished scholar in an impressive variety of fields. Drawing on her diverse academic backgrounds, Nussbaum has written extensively about emotions and their importance for law from the perspective of her primary specialty, philosophy. Her book Hiding from...

This chapter deals with the enforceability of U.S. opt-out class actions in continental Europe, with special attention to Italy, France and Spain. The study sets out by a thorough analysis of U.S. precedents concerning the availability of extra-compensatory damages in complex litigation (among...

Overcriminalization takes many forms and impacts the American criminal justice system in varying ways. This article focuses on a select portion of this phenomenon by examining two types of overcriminalization prevalent in white collar criminal law. The first type of over criminalization...

A defendant who admits to having committed an offense may nevertheless be acquitted if he can provide a legally cognizable justification or excuse for his actions by raising an affirmative defense. This article explains how affirmative defenses generate social benefits in the form of avoided...

When should laws be enforced by private actors and when should society rely on law enforcement by public authorities? This question has been analyzed in great detail in law & economics scholarship. This article surveys the literature and outlines a framework of criteria for deciding whether...

This is a survey of the field of economic analysis of law, focusing on the work of economists. The survey covers the three central areas of civil law - liability for accidents (tort law), property law, and contracts - as well as the litigation process and public enforcement of law

Conventional models of judicial behavior assume that, barring extraordinary circumstances, lower courts will comply with changes in governing law. The few studies that have examined judicial compliance with higher court decisions have concluded that judges quickly adopt even controversial new...

The legal standard of proof in any criminal trial is reasonable doubt, but economic models argue for a variable standard. Two economic arguments are tested with data on federal trials over the last decade. First, a trier of fact should respond to a more serious charge with a higher burden of...

The "trial penalty" is a concept widely accepted by all the major actors in the criminal justice system: defendants, prosecutors, defense attorneys, court employees, and judges. The notion is that defendants receive longer sentences at trial than they would have through plea bargain, often...