Compensating plaintiffs and punishing defendants: is bifurcation necessary?

نویسندگان

  • E Greene
  • W D Woody
  • R Winter
چکیده

Critics of the civil jury have proposed several procedural reforms to address the concern that damage awards are capricious and unpredictable. One such reform is the bifurcation or separation of various phases of a trial that involves multiple claims for damages. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of bifurcating the compensatory and punitive damages phases of a civil tort trial. We manipulated the wealth of the defendant and the reprehensibility of the defendant's conduct (both sets of evidence theoretically related to punitive but not to compensatory damages) across three cases in a jury analog study. We wondered whether jurors would misuse the punitive damages evidence in fixing compensatory damages and whether bifurcation would effectively undo this practice. Our findings indicated that mock jurors did not improperly consider punitive damages evidence in their decisions about compensation. Moreover, bifurcation had the unexpected effect of augmenting punitive damage awards. These findings raise questions about the merits of bifurcation in cases that involve multiple claims for damages.

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

قواعد استرداد دادخواست و دعوای بدوی در فرض تعدد اصحاب دعوا

According to the rule of parties initiative, parties are free to terminate trial and procedural law respects the freedom of their will, although restrains it depending upon some circumstances. however, withdrawal of a case when there are multiple plaintiffs or defendants, may raise complicated issues which the Act does not have any solution for them and their suitable rules should be inferred b...

متن کامل

Navigating Expert Reliability: Are Criminal Standards of Certainty Being Left on the Dock?

This article shows that, as to proffers of asserted expert testimony, civil defendants win their Daubert reliability challenges to plaintiffs’ proffers most of the time, and that criminal defendants virtually always lose their reliability challenges to government proffers. And, when civil defendants’ proffers are challenged by plaintiffs, those defendants usually win, but when criminal defendan...

متن کامل

Secrecy and justice in the ongoing saga of DBCP litigation.

Since the 1980s, banana workers from Central America and elsewhere have filed cases in the United States for sterility damages caused by exposure to the nematicide dibromochloropropane (DBCP) used during the 1960s and 1970s. These plaintiffs' efforts at holding fruit and chemical corporations accountable have been met with numerous obstacles. Many cases have been dismissed on the grounds that t...

متن کامل

Resolution of Common Questions in MDL Proceedings

Multidistrict litigation procedures have grown in significance as an important tool for resolving large-scale litigation. Indeed, in recent years, various reports have noted that from one third to one half of all cases in the federal courts are part of MDL proceedings.1 From the defendants’ perspective, consolidation in a federal MDL proceeding may make nationwide litigation more manageable. Fr...

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 24 2  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2000