|
||||
|
||||
The Role of Judicial Discretion in Dispute Settlement
James Andreoni University of California, San Diego (UCSD) Ray D. Madoff Boston College - Law School March 24, 2008 Boston College Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 151 Abstract: We consider two common modes of judicial resolution: judicial discretion, where the judge or jury has broad discretion in fashioning a remedy, and winner take all where the remedy is pre-determined by the governing substantive law. We analyze these systems in light of the fact that pre-trial bargainers have been shown to have excessive confidence in their own positions. We find theoretically that winner-take-all rules magnify the effects of over-confidence and diminish the likelihood of settling relative to judicial discretion. We confirm our model with a laboratory experiment showing significantly fewer pre-trial agreements under winner-take-all. These results imply that increasing judicial discretion in fashioning remedies could increase pre-trial agreements and promote efficiency. This has implications for many areas of law, including donative transfers, property law, patent infringements, and agreements on liquidated damages.
Keywords: litigation, wills, settlement, donative transfers Working Paper SeriesDate posted: March 25, 2008 ; Last revised: April 30, 2008Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||
© 2009 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use Privacy Policy
This page was served by apollo4 in 0.125 seconds.