Explaining the Variance in the Number of Tort Suits across U.S. States and between the United States and England
AbstractThere is enormous variance across jurisdictions in the number of cases filed, even when the laws in the different jurisdictions are similar. This article is an empirical study of the variance in the number of tort cases across U.S. states (plus the District, of Columbia and England), all of which have basically similar common-law tort principles and procedures. Regression analysis reveals that explanatory variable that can be given an economic interpretation, such as income, education, and urbanization, can explain much of the variance among these jurisdictions and that cultural factors are less important. A surprising result is that, after correcting for the economic variables, England appears to be more rather than, as generally believed, much less litigious than the United States. Copyright 1997 by the University of Chicago.
Download InfoTo our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by University of Chicago Press in its journal Journal of Legal Studies.
Volume (Year): 26 (1997)
Issue (Month): 2 (June)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Baye, M.R. & Kovenock D. & De Vries, C.G., 2000.
"Comparative Analysis of Litigation Systems: an Auction-Theoretic Approach,"
Purdue University Economics Working Papers
1137, Purdue University, Department of Economics.
- Michael R. Baye & Dan Kovenock & Casper G. Vries, 2005. "Comparative Analysis of Litigation Systems: An Auction-Theoretic Approach," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(505), pages 583-601, 07.
- Michael R. Baye & Dan Kovenock & Casper G. de Vries, 2000. "Comparative Analysis of Litigation Systems: An Auction-Theoretic Approach," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 00-103/2, Tinbergen Institute.
- Michael R. Baye & Dan Kovenock & Casper G. de Vries, 2004. "Comparative Analysis of Litigation Systems: An Auction-Theoretic Approach," Working Papers 2004-24, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
- Michael R. Baye & Dan Kovenock & Casper De Vries, 2000. "Comparative Analysis of Litigation Systems: An Auction-Theoretic Approach," CESifo Working Paper Series 373, CESifo Group Munich.
- Michael R. Baye & Dan Kovenock & Casper G. de Vries, 2000. "Comparative Analysis of Litigation Systems: An Auction-Theoretic Approach," CIG Working Papers FS IV 00-13, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
- Frenzen, Paul D. & Buzby, Jean C. & Rasco, Barbara, 2001. "Product Liability And Microbial Foodborne Illness," Agricultural Economics Reports 34059, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
- Paolo Buonanno & Matteo M. Galizzi, 2010.
"Advocatus, et non latro? Testing the Supplier-Induced-Demand Hypothesis for Italian Courts of Justice,"
2010.52, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
- Paolo Buonanno & Matteo M. Galizzi, 2009. "Advocatus, et non latro? Testing the supplier-induced demand hypothesis for Italian courts of justice," Working Papers 0914, University of Brescia, Department of Economics.
- Amanda Carmignani & Silvia Giacomelli, 2010. "Too many lawyers? Litigation in Italian civil courts," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 745, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
- Gerhard Clemenz & Klaus Gugler, 2000. "Macroeconomic Development and Civil Litigation," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 215-230, May.
- Paolo Buonanno & Matteo M. Galizzi, 2012. "Advocatus, et non Latro? Testing the Supplier-Induced Demand Hypothesis for the Italian Courts of Justice," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 250, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journals Division).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.