Antitrust Settlements and Trial Outcomes
AbstractRisk aversion plays an important role in explaining why antitrust cases settle instead of going to trial. Using a jointly estimated model of settlement and trial outcome, the authors find that a one percent increase in the probability that the plaintiff wins at trial raises the probability of a settlement by 0.13 percent. They also find that reputation effects are not a significant factor for defendants, so the risk aversion of the defendants does not play a dominant role in determining whether the parties settle. Plaintiffs are more likely to win in certain jurisdictions, which encourages venue shopping by plaintiffs. Copyright 1996 by MIT Press.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by MIT Press in its journal Review of Economics & Statistics.
Volume (Year): 78 (1996)
Issue (Month): 3 (August)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Dari-Mattiacci, Giuseppe & Deffains, Bruno & Lovat, Bruno, 2011. "The dynamics of the legal system," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(1-2), pages 95-107, June.
- Martin Carree & Andrea Günster & Maarten Schinkel, 2010. "European Antitrust Policy 1957–2004: An Analysis of Commission Decisions," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 97-131, March.
- Stiegert, Kyle W. & Hamilton, Stephen F., 1998. "Backward Implicit Contracts, Pre-Commitment And Market Power In The International Durum Wheat Market," 1998 Annual meeting, August 2-5, Salt Lake City, UT 20833, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
- Oliver Budzinski & Björn Kuchinke, 2012.
"Deal or No Deal? Consensual Arrangements as an Instrument of European Competition Policy?,"
Review of Economics,
Helmut Schmidt Universitaet Hamburg, vol. 63(3), pages 265-292.
- Budzinski, Oliver & Kuchinke, Björn A., 2012. "Deal or no deal? Consensual arrangements as an instrument of European competition policy," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 76, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
- Daniel P. Kessler & Daniel L. Rubinfeld, 2004. "Empirical Study of the Civil Justice System," NBER Working Papers 10825, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Hamilton, Stephen F. & Stiegert, Kyle W., 2002. "An empirical test of the rent-shifting hypothesis: the case of state trading enterprises," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 135-157, October.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Karie Kirkpatrick).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.