Asbestos Litigation: Procedural Innovations and Forum Shopping
This paper examines how forum shopping and procedural innovations affect the outcomes of asbestos trials using a new data set of all asbestos trials from 1987 to 2003. When lawsuits are filed in six particularly favorable jurisdictions, plaintiffsâ€™ expected returns from trial are found to increase by $800,000 to nearly $4 million. The procedural innovations are bifurcated trials, bouquet trials, and consolidation of multiple plaintiffsâ€™ claims for trial. Bifurcated and bouquet trials are found to increase plaintiffsâ€™ expected returns from trial by $650,000 and $1.2 million, respectively. Small consolidations are found to increase plaintiffsâ€™ probabilities of winning and receiving punitive damages, but larger consolidations are associated with lower damage awards.
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Landes, William M, 1993. "Sequential versus Unitary Trials: An Economic Analysis," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(1), pages 99-134, January.
- Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2001.
"Do Exposure Suits Produce a 'Race to File'? An Economic Analysis of a Tort for Risk,"
2002-42, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Jun 2004.
- Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2005. "Do Exposure Suits Produce a "Race to File"? An Economic Analysis of a Tort for Risk," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(3), pages 613-627, Autumn.
- Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2004. "Do Exposure Suits Produce a "Race to File"? An Economic Analysis of a Tort for Risk," Working papers 2004-25, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
- Michelle J. White, 1989. "An Empirical Test of the Comparative and Contributory Negligence Rules in Accident Law," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(3), pages 308-330, Autumn.
- Eisenberg, Theodore, et al, 1997. "The Predictability of Punitive Damages," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 623-661, June.
- Kathryn E. Spier, 2002. "Settlement with Multiple Plaintiffs: The Role of Insolvency," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 295-323, October.
- Wittman, Donald, 1986. "The Price of Negligence under Differing Liability Rules," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(1), pages 151-163, April.
- Cooter, Robert D & Rubinfeld, Daniel L, 1989. "Economic Analysis of Legal Disputes and Their Resolution," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 27(3), pages 1067-1097, September.
- Priest, George L, 1997. "Procedural versus Substantive Controls of Mass Tort Class Actions," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 521-573, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:35:y:2006:p:365-398. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
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.