Mandatory Arbitration and Civil Litigation: An Empirical Study of Medical Malpractice Litigation in the West

Albert Yoon

American Law and Economics Review, 2004, vol. 6, issue 1, 95-134

Abstract: This article looks at the effect that pretrial, statutorily required screening panels in Nevada have had on medical malpractice litigation. I use two unique data sets on litigation in Nevada and neighboring states from 1983--88, during which the Nevada legislature enacted screening panels. Applying time-series and difference-in-difference analyses, I show that observed decreases in Nevada with respect to damage awards, attorney's fees, and duration in litigation reflected a broader secular trend. The panels did, however, reduce the relative probability of claims requiring resolution by the Nevada courts. Copyright 2004, Oxford University Press.

Date: 2004
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

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:6:y:2004:i:1:p:95-134

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 ().