Showing 1 - 10 of 60,205
We construct game theoretic foundations for bargaining in the shadow of a trial. Plaintiff and defendant both have noisy signals of a common-value trial judgment and make simultaneous offers to settle. If the offers cross, they settle on the average offer; otherwise, both litigants incur an...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011509331
We construct game theoretic foundations for bargaining in the shadow of a trial. Plaintiff and defendant both have noisy signals of a common-value trial judgment and make simultaneous offers to settle. If the offers cross, they settle on the average offer; otherwise, both litigants incur an...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10013319843
We exploit a controlled frameless laboratory experiment to study settlement negotiations and the plaintiff's decision to raise a lawsuit in case of an impasse. We find that greater variance in court outcomes increases the litigation rate and lowers the settlement rate. This latter finding goes...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10008991286
The paper analyzes the effects of different litigation cost allocation rules, detection skill of judges (judicial errors), and the mode of enforcement of foreign judgments on the home bias in trade and sheds a new light on the so-called border-effect puzzle. In our model the border effect or...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10013105251
Over a century ago, Oliver Wendell Holmes invited scholars to look at law through the lens of probability theory: ‘The prophecies of what the courts will do in fact, and nothing more pretentious, are what I mean by the law'. But Holmes himself, and few others, have taken up this intriguing...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10013067657
In litigation models, the parties' probability to succeed in a lawsuit hinge upon the merits of the parties' claims and their litigation efforts. In this paper we extend this framework to consider an important procedural aspect of the legal system: the standard of proof. We recast the...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012936143
In this paper, we model litigation as a series of strategic contests. Specifically, building on the work of others, we model pre-trial litigation as a Colonel Blotto game, i.e. a game of allocative strategic mismatch in which the parties must allocate scarce time resources to a finite number of...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012987835
This paper studies experimentally the impact of the split-award statute, where the state takes a share of the plaintiff's punitive damage award, on litigation outcomes. Our findings indicate that dispute rates are significantly lower when bargaining is performed under the split-award...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014069879
This paper develops a new theory of possibly frivolous litigation by focusing on a plaintiff's options to unilaterally abandon a lawsuit. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(i) and its various state law counterparts permit, under certain circumstances, a plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss her...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014074262
We consider models of pretrial negotiations where both costly voluntary disclosure and costly mandatory discovery are possible. When the uninformed party makes the final offer (the screening game), mandatory discovery will be utilized, if it is not very costly, but voluntary disclosure will not...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014029862