IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/amlawe/v20y2018i2p245-288..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Rationale for Motions in the Design of Adjudication

Author

Listed:
  • Steven Shavell

Abstract

The conduct of adjudication is often influenced by motions—requests made by litigants to modify the course of adjudication. The question studied in this article is why adjudication should be designed so as to permit the use of motions. The answer developed is that litigants will naturally know a great deal about their specific matter, whereas a court will ordinarily know little except to the degree that the court has already invested effort to appreciate it. By giving litigants the right to bring motions, the judicial system leads litigants to efficiently provide information to courts that is relevant to the adjudicative process.

Suggested Citation

  • Steven Shavell, 2018. "The Rationale for Motions in the Design of Adjudication," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 20(2), pages 245-288.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:amlawe:v:20:y:2018:i:2:p:245-288.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/aler/ahy004
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:amlawe:v:20:y:2018:i:2:p:245-288.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/aler .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.