A Simple Proposal to Halve Litigation Costs
نویسندگان
چکیده
This article discusses a simple proposal that could reduce litigation costs in the country by about half, yet without compromising the functioning of the liability system in a significant way. Under the proposal (1) only half the cases brought before a court would be randomly chosen for litigation, and (2) damages would be doubled in cases accepted for litigation. The first element of the proposal saves litigation costs and the second preserves deterrence of undesirable behavior. The effect of the proposal on settlement is emphasized, one important implication of which is that settlement is likely to occur before cases are filed (and possibly randomly eliminated), in which event plaintiffs will definitely be compensated. * Professor of Law, Harvard Law School ** Samuel R. Rosenthal Professor of Law and Economics, Harvard Law School. Research support from the John M. Olin Center for Law, Economics and Business is gratefully acknowledged. A Simple Proposal to Halve Litigation Costs © 2005. David Rosenberg and Steven Shavell. All Rights Reserved.
منابع مشابه
The Optimum Level of Non-Oil Exports: A Theatrical Proposal on Iran's Case
Iran is one f the biggest oil producer and exporter of the world. Due to the special administrative and constitutional structure of the country, i.e. economic, social and political reasons, the government budget and revenues depend heavily on oil exports. The aim of this article is to suggest a theoretical proposal on the optimum level of non-oil exports such that it will clear up the idea of e...
متن کاملReducing The Costs Of Litigation
What are the costs of litigation? David M. Trubek the author of The Costs of Ordinary Litigation breaks down litigation into "events" to answer this question. Through a study that randomly sampled civil cases from federal district and state courts, data has been complied and broken down into categories or stated differently into "events of litigation." [1] The study's data focuses on an attorne...
متن کاملThreats to sue and cost divisibility under asymmetric information
The early literature on litigation and settlement assumed that a plaintiff’s threat to litigate is credible only when her litigation value—the difference between the expected judgment and her litigation costs—is positive. More recently, however, Bebchuk (1996) has suggested that even if the plaintiff’s litigation value is negative, divisibility of her litigation costs may render credibility to ...
متن کاملLitigation as a Tournament∗
This paper analyzes civil litigation between a plaintiff and a defendant who exert costly effort in a tournament game. In the unique Nash equilibrium the litigant with the stronger case is more likely to win, but there is distortion in the sense that the equilibrium probability of success is closer to 0.5 than the prior is. A cost-shifting rule determines the proportion of the winner’s costs re...
متن کاملDeterrence, litigation costs, and the statute of limitations for tort suits
The conventional justification for a statute of limitations on tort suits (or any other legal claim) is that evidence deteriorates over time, thereby increasing the likelihood of legal error. The optimal statute balances this cost of a longer statute length against the dilution in deterrence that results from a shorter length. In this paper I develop a formal model to show that a finite statute...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2005