Punitive damage decision making: the decisions of citizens and trial court judges.

نویسنده

  • Jennifer K Robbennolt
چکیده

Some states have allocated the authority to determine the amount of punitive damages to judges rather than to juries. This study explored the determination of damages by jury-eligible citizens and trial court judges. The punitive damage awards of both groups were of similar magnitude and variability. The compensatory damages ofjurors were marginally lower but, in some conditions, were more variable than the compensatory damage awards of judges. Both groups appropriately utilized information about both the actual and potential severity of the harm to the plaintiff in determining punitive damages and used only the actual severity of the injury in determining compensatory damages. The punitive damage awards of both groups were influenced by the wealth of the defendant, but the compensatory damage awards of judges were marginally more influenced by defendant wealth than those of citizens. The results are discussed in the context of proposals for punitive damages reform.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Punitive Damages: How Judges and Juries Perform

A substantial recent literature has documented the inability of jurors to make sound decisions with respect to punitive damages, particularly for health, safety, and environmental torts. Included in this literature are experimental studies documenting the better performance of judges than jurors for the same case scenarios. Recent research by Eisenberg et al. (2002) has suggested, however, that...

متن کامل

The Impact of Legal Schools of Thought

This paper provides a quantitative analysis of the e ects of legal schools of thought on appellate jurisprudence and criminal sentencing decisions. We construct measures of the in uence of a major school of conservative legal thought Law and Economics using the linguistic features of judicial opinions and attendance at a law-and-economics training program. We examine the impact of law-and-econo...

متن کامل

From Lab Bench to Court Bench: Using Science to Inform Decisions in Juvenile Court

Juvenile court judges are asked to determine what is in the best interest of the child in every case they hear. As Judge Cindy S. Lederman writes, making these decisions without an awareness of the science of child development can be detrimental to the mental and physical well-being of the child. Yet until about a decade ago, court decisions were routinely made without taking into consideration...

متن کامل

An Evaluation of Iranian Judges’ Decisions about The Act of Embryo Donation

Embryo donation was one of the infertility treatment methods introduced to the Iranian legal system in 2003 (Act of Embryo Donation) and its by-law passed in 2005 after numerous discussions. Embryo donation is a new legal issue in Iran. No similar act has been previously legislated in the legal system; however, on the other hand, the importance of the judicial procedure in its execution cannot ...

متن کامل

Inconsistency in evidentiary standards for medical testimony: disorder in the courts.

Several recent decisions by the US Supreme Court have strengthened the ability of federal courts to consider medical testimony regarding injuries associated with exposure to toxic substances. Judges are expected to examine the basis of all expert testimony before it is introduced at trial to ensure that it meets the same standards of intellectual rigor that professionals use outside the courtro...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • Law and human behavior

دوره 26 3  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2002