Research Handbook on the Economics of Torts
Show Less

Research Handbook on the Economics of Torts

  • Research Handbooks in Law and Economics series

Edited by Jennifer H. Arlen

This pioneering Handbook contains specially-commissioned chapters on tort law from leading experts in the field. This volume evaluates issues of vital importance to those seeking to understand and reform the tort law and the litigation process, taking a multi-disciplinary approach, including theoretical economic analysis, empirical analysis, socio-economic analysis, and behavioral analysis. Topics discussed include products liability, medical malpractice, causation, proximate cause, joint and several liability, class actions, mass torts, vicarious liability, settlement, damage rules, juries, tort reform, and potential alternatives to the tort system. Scholars, students, legal practitioners, regulators, and judges with an interest in tort law, litigation, damages, and reform will find this seminal Handbook an invaluable addition to their libraries.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details

Chapter 1: Empirical Analysis of Civil Litigation: Torts Trials in State Courts

Michael Heise

Extract

Competing perceptions of civil litigation in the United States abound. These perceptions vary, often substantially. Critics of the American civil litigation system typically focus on the tort system, emphasizing excessive litigation volume, inefficiencies, unpredictability, as well as the related, mounting individual and collective social and economic costs (e.g., Huber 1988; Olsen 1991). During the 1990s, one prominent critic—former U.S. Vice President Dan Quayle—highlighted civil litigation’s cost to the economy and moved civil litigation reform to the center of his legislative agenda. A few years later, the Republican’s Contract With America policy initiatives sought tort reform that addressed a court system burdened with frivolous lawsuits (e.g., Thompson 2009). The decibel levels of many outcries over the last decade over perceptions of a litigation “explosion” or “liability crisis” continue to reach new heights and cut across traditional coalitions and ideologies (Miller 2003). The now-legendary (and often misunderstood) “McDonald’s coffee case” persists as a symbol to many of a tort system unhinged (e.g., Cain 2007). Not everyone, however, accepts the litigation “explosion” or “crisis” narratives. Indeed, for other critics problems with the American tort system flow from too few successful tort actions (e.g., Arlen and MacLeod 2003; Arlen 2010; Mello et al. 2006) and, where liability exists, insufficient damages (e.g., Arlen 1999).

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.


Further information

or login to access all content.