The Evolution of Common Law
We present a model of lawmaking by appellate courts in which judges influenced by policy preferences can distinguish precedents at some cost. We find a cost and a benefit of diversity of judicial views. Policyâ€motivated judges distort the law away from efficiency, but diversity of judicial views also fosters legal evolution and increases the lawâ€™s precision. We call our central finding the Cardozo theorem: even when judges are motivated by personal agendas, legal evolution is, on average, beneficial because it washes out judicial biases and renders the law more precise. Our paper provides a theoretical foundation for the evolutionary adaptability of common law.
|Date of creation:||2007|
|Date of revision:|
|Publication status:||Published in Journal of Political Economy -Chicago-|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.economics.harvard.edu/
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hrv:faseco:3451305. 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: (Ben Steinberg)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.