Litigation and Selection with Correlated Two-Sided Incomplete Information

Daniel Klerman, Yoon-Ho Alex Lee and Lawrence Liu

American Law and Economics Review, 2018, vol. 20, issue 2, 382-459

Abstract: This article explores the selection of disputes for litigation in a setting with two-sided incomplete information and correlated signals. The models analyzed here suggest that Priest and Klein’s conclusion that close cases are more likely to go to trial than extreme cases remains largely valid when their model is interpreted as involving correlated, two-sided incomplete information and is updated (i) to incorporate take-it-or-leave-it offers or the Chatterjee–Samuelson mechanism, (ii) to take into account the credibility of the plaintiff’s threat to go to trial, and (iii) to allow parties to make sophisticated, Bayesian inferences based on knowledge of the distribution of disputes. On the other hand, Priest and Klein’s prediction that the plaintiff will win 50% of litigated cases is sensitive to bargaining and parameter assumptions.

Date: 2018
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (9)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/aler/ahy005 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:amlawe:v:20:y:2018:i:2:p:382-459.

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

American Law and Economics Review is currently edited by J.J. Prescott and Albert Choi

More articles in American Law and Economics Review from American Law and Economics Association Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().