Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1689272
 


 



A Skeptical Attitude about Product Liability is Justified: A Reply to Professors Goldberg and Zipursky


A. Mitchell Polinsky


Stanford Law School; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)

Steven Shavell


Harvard Law School; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)

June 30, 2010

Stanford Law and Economics Olin Working Paper No. 399

Abstract:     
In The Uneasy Case for Product Liability, we maintained that the benefits of product liability are likely to be less than its costs for many products, especially widely sold ones. Our article was intended to alter the dominant view held by the judiciary and commentators that product liability has a clear justification on grounds of public policy. We argued instead that a skeptical attitude toward product liability should be adopted.

Professors John Goldberg and Benjamin Zipursky strongly criticize our article in The Easy Case for Products Liability Law: A Response to Professors Polinsky and Shavell. To a significant extent, however, they attack a straw man, for they impute to us a radical thesis – that product liability should be eliminated for all widely sold products – that we manifestly did not advance. In fact, we argued that whether product liability is undesirable depends on the particular product. Goldberg and Zipursky also ascribe to us other opinions that exaggerate what we said in our article – notably, they state that we believe that product liability has no beneficial effect on product safety for widely sold products. It is not surprising, therefore, that they are unable to support these mischaracterizations with citations to statements in our article.

The major claim that Goldberg and Zipursky develop is that our benefit-cost analysis fails to demonstrate that the case for product liability is uneasy. In our view, their critique is deficient on multiple accounts, including that it contains numerous distortions and errors, and hence does not alter our original conclusion.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 19

Keywords: product liability, public policy, benefit-cost analysis

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: October 9, 2010  

Suggested Citation

Polinsky, A. Mitchell and Shavell, Steven, A Skeptical Attitude about Product Liability is Justified: A Reply to Professors Goldberg and Zipursky (June 30, 2010). Stanford Law and Economics Olin Working Paper No. 399. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1689272 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1689272

Contact Information

A. Mitchell Polinsky (Contact Author)
Stanford Law School ( email )
559 Nathan Abbott Way
Stanford, CA 94305-8610
United States
650-723-0886 (Phone)
650-723-3557 (Fax)
National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)
1050 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States
Steven Shavell
Harvard Law School ( email )
1575 Massachusetts
Hauser 406
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States
617-495-3668 (Phone)
617-496-2256 (Fax)
National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)
1050 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 609
Downloads: 67
Download Rank: 202,109

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.343 seconds