IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecm/nasm04/628.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Punitive Damage Awards, Frivolous Lawsuits and Firm’s Level of Care

Author

Listed:
  • Maxim Nikitin
  • Claudia M.Landeo

Abstract

Punitive damage awards have been widely criticized for generating a plaintiff’s windfall (i.e., a payment in excess of the costs of pursuing the punitive claim), which promotes unnecessary litigation, the escalation of liability insurance premiums and over-deterrence. In an attempt to overcome these negative effects, several US states have implemented many different kinds of tort reform. Some reforms take the form of caps or limits on punitive damage awards while others, called “split-awards†, have mandated that a share of the award be allocated to the plaintiff with the remainder going to the state. Our paper presents a strategic model of litigation under a negligence rule. We extend Spier's (1997) theoretical framework on litigation by explicitly modeling frivolous lawsuits. In this way, we capture the main welfare effects of punitive awards on firm's level of care and the likelihood of frivolous lawsuits. We derive sufficient conditions for a unique universally-divine mixed-strategy perfect Bayesian equilibrium (Banks and Sobel, 1987) in which some defendants choose to be negligent, but some meet the negligence standard. In this equilibrium, some lawsuits are not meritorious (frivolous lawsuits), and some lawsuits are dropped, some are resolved out-of-court and some go to trial. We then use this framework to analyze the welfare effect of punitive damages, and to explore the effect of split-awards and caps on the probability that firms choose to be careful, the probability that frivolous lawsuits are filed, and the probability that a lawsuit proceeds to the award stage of a trial. Consistent with Katz (1990), we predict that caps increase the likelihood of frivolous lawsuits. Given that the defendant does not know the type of plaintiff it is confronting and that only in meritorious cases punitive damages are awarded, the likelihood that the defendant makes an out-of-court settlement offer is negatively related to the amount of the award. Then, a reduction in the award due to a cap will increase the expected payoff for a frivolous plaintiff, generating additional incentives to file lawsuits. Consistent with Babcock and Pogarsky (1999) and Daughety and Reinganum (2003), we also find that caps and split-awards decrease the likelihood of trial. Furthermore, caps and split-awards reduce the likelihood that a firm chooses to be careful, because they lower the expected litigation costs. The firm reacts to these lower expected costs by reducing expenditures on safety. Finally, we find that the overall welfare effect of these reforms is ambiguous, because the reduction in the litigation costs of meritorious plaintiffs and defendants may be offset by an increase in the number of frivolous lawsuits and the likelihood of accidents.

Suggested Citation

  • Maxim Nikitin & Claudia M.Landeo, 2004. "Punitive Damage Awards, Frivolous Lawsuits and Firm’s Level of Care," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 628, Econometric Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecm:nasm04:628
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below 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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ireland, Peter N., 2003. "Endogenous money or sticky prices?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(8), pages 1623-1648, November.
    2. Obstfeld, Maurice & Rogoff, Kenneth, 1995. "Exchange Rate Dynamics Redux," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(3), pages 624-660, June.
    3. Lane, Philip R., 2001. "The new open economy macroeconomics: a survey," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, pages 235-266.
    4. Basu, Susanto, 1995. "Intermediate Goods and Business Cycles: Implications for Productivity and Welfare," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 512-531, June.
    5. Gali, Jordi & Gertler, Mark, 1999. "Inflation dynamics: A structural econometric analysis," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 195-222, October.
    6. McCallum, Bennett T. & Nelson, Edward, 1999. "Nominal income targeting in an open-economy optimizing model," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, pages 553-578.
    7. McCallum, Bennett T & Nelson, Edward, 2000. "Monetary Policy for an Open Economy: An Alternative Framework with Optimizing Agents and Sticky Prices," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 74-91, Winter.
    8. Schmitt-Grohe, Stephanie & Uribe, Martin, 2003. "Closing small open economy models," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, pages 163-185.
    9. Kim, Jinill & Kim, Sunghyun Henry, 2003. "Spurious welfare reversals in international business cycle models," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 471-500, August.
    10. Steve Ambler & Alain Guay & Louis Phaneuf, 2003. "Labor Market Imperfections and the Dynamics of Postwar Business Cycles," Cahiers de recherche 0319, CIRPEE.
    11. Francesco Giavazzi & Charles Wyplosz, 1984. "The Real Exchange Rate, the Current Account, and the Speed of Adjustment," NBER Chapters,in: Exchange Rate Theory and Practice, pages 335-356 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Corsetti, Giancarlo & Pesenti, Paolo, 2005. "International dimensions of optimal monetary policy," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 281-305, March.
    13. Mendoza, Enrique G. & Razin, Assaf & Tesar, Linda L., 1994. "Effective tax rates in macroeconomics: Cross-country estimates of tax rates on factor incomes and consumption," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 297-323, December.
    14. Jinill Kim & Sunghyun Henry Kim & Ernst Schaumburg & Christopher A. Sims, 2003. "Calculating and using second order accurate solutions of discrete time dynamic equilibrium models," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2003-61, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    15. Ingram, Beth Fisher & Kocherlakota, Narayana R. & Savin, N. E., 1994. "Explaining business cycles: A multiple-shock approach," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 415-428, December.
    16. Jordi Gali & Tommaso Monacelli, 1999. "Optimal Monetary Policy and Exchange Rate Volatility in a Small Open Economy," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 438, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 15 Nov 1999.
    17. Smets, Frank & Wouters, Raf, 2002. "Openness, imperfect exchange rate pass-through and monetary policy," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(5), pages 947-981, July.
    18. Woodford Michael, 2002. "Inflation Stabilization and Welfare," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-53, February.
    19. Kollmann, Robert, 2002. "Monetary policy rules in the open economy: effects on welfare and business cycles," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(5), pages 989-1015, July.
    20. Ireland, Peter N., 2004. "A method for taking models to the data," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 1205-1226, March.
    21. Atish Ghosh & Holger Wolf, 2001. "Imperfect Exchange Rate Passthrough: Strategic Pricing and Menu Costs," CESifo Working Paper Series 436, CESifo Group Munich.
    22. Blanchard, Olivier Jean & Kahn, Charles M, 1980. "The Solution of Linear Difference Models under Rational Expectations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(5), pages 1305-1311, July.
    23. Ali Dib, 2011. "Monetary Policy in Estimated Models of Small Open and Closed Economies," Open Economies Review, Springer, pages 769-796.
    24. Jinill Kim & Sunghyun Kim & Ernst Schaumburg & Christopher A. Sims, 2003. "Calculating and Using Second Order Accurate Solutions of Discrete Time," Levine's Bibliography 666156000000000284, UCLA Department of Economics.
    25. Griffin, Peter, 1992. "The Impact of Affirmative Action on Labor Demand: A Test of Some Implications of the Le Chatelier Principle," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 74(2), pages 251-260, May.
    26. Abdelhak S Senhadji, 1997. "Sources of Debt Accumulation in a Small Open Economy," IMF Working Papers 97/146, International Monetary Fund.
    27. Taylor, John B., 1993. "Discretion versus policy rules in practice," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 195-214, December.
    28. Bergin, Paul R., 2003. "Putting the 'New Open Economy Macroeconomics' to a test," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 3-34, May.
    29. Steve Ambler & Ali Dib & Nooman Rebei, 2003. "Nominal Rigidities and Exchange Rate Pass-Through in a Structural Model of a Small Open Economy," Staff Working Papers 03-29, Bank of Canada.
    30. Calvo, Guillermo A., 1983. "Staggered prices in a utility-maximizing framework," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 383-398, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Punitve Damage Awards; Settlement; Litigation; Frivolous Lawsuits; Asymmetric Information;

    JEL classification:

    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process
    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    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:ecm:nasm04:628. 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: (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/essssea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.