|
||||
|
||||
Negative-Expected-Value SuitsLucian A. BebchukHarvard Law School; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER); European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI) Alon KlementInterdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliyah - Radzyner School of Law December 1, 2009 PROCEDURAL LAW AND ECONOMICS, Chris Sanchirico, ed., 2011 Harvard Law and Economics Discussion Paper No. 656 Abstract: We review the literature on negative-expected-value suits (NEV suits) – suits in which the plaintiff would obtain a negative expected return from pursuing the suit all the way to judgment. We discuss alternative theories as to why, and when, plaintiffs with NEV suits can extract a positive settlement amount. In particular, we explain how such a plaintiff can extract a positive settlement due (i) asymmetry of information between the parties, (ii) divisibility of the plaintiff's litigation costs, (iii) upfront costs that the defendant must incur before the plaintiff incurs any costs; (iv) expectation that the arrival of information during the course of the litigation may turn the suit into a positive-expected-value one, (5) reputation that enables the plaintiff to bind itself to going to trial if the defendant refuses to settle; or (6) the plaintiff’s having a contingency fee or retainer arrangement with its lawyer.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 12 Keywords: Litigation, settlement, frivolous suits, negative expected value suits, positive expected value suit, divisibility, credibility, fee-shifting, contingent fees, retainer JEL Classification: K19, K41 Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: January 12, 2010 ; Last revised: May 8, 2011Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.422 seconds