Deterrence and liability for intentional torts

Jonathan Klick and John MacDonald

International Review of Law and Economics, 2020, vol. 63, issue C

Abstract: Law and economics suggests that liability for intentional torts is motivated by deterrence. The tortfeasor’s investments in undertaking the intentional act and the victim’s investments in precautions against the harm arising from the act are likely to be socially wasteful. Further, especially in the case of battery, the benefit of committing the intentional act will generally fall short of the loss to the victim. For these reasons, it makes sense to impose liability on the tortfeasor for the full loss experienced by the victim of an intentional tort. This deterrence theory requires that intentional tortfeasors are sensitive to liability exposure. To test this assumption, we examine changes in state-level homicide rates in response to caps on non-economic damages in tort. We find that murder rates increase by more than 5 percent when states adopt caps on non-economic damages.

Keywords: Crime; Deterrence; Torts; Liability; Homicide (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818820301393
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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:eee:irlaec:v:63:y:2020:i:c:s0144818820301393

DOI: 10.1016/j.irle.2020.105926

Access Statistics for this article

International Review of Law and Economics is currently edited by C. Ott, A. W. Katz and H-B. Schäfer

More articles in International Review of Law and Economics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().