Judicial Fact Discretion
Nicola Gennaioli and
Andrei Shleifer
Scholarly Articles from Harvard University Department of Economics
Abstract:
Following legal realists, we model the causes and consequences of trial judges exercising discretion in finding facts in a trial. We identify two motivations for the exercise of such discretion: judicial policy preferences and judges’ aversion to reversal on appeal when the law is unsettled. In the latter case, judges exercising fact discretion find the facts that fit the settled precedents, even when they have no policy preferences. In a standard model of a tort, judicial fact discretion leads to setting of damages unpredictable from true facts of the case but predictable from knowledge of judicial preferences, distorts the number and severity of accidents, and generates welfare losses. It also encourages litigants to take extreme positions in court and raises the incidence of litigation relative to settlement, especially in new and complex disputes for which the law is unsettled.
Date: 2008
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (32)
Published in Journal of Legal Studies -Chicago-
Downloads: (external link)
http://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3451304/Shleifer_JudicialFact.pdf (application/pdf)
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 404 Not found (http://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3451304/Shleifer_JudicialFact.pdf [301 Moved Permanently]--> https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3451304/Shleifer_JudicialFact.pdf)
Related works:
Journal Article: Judicial Fact Discretion (2008) 
Working Paper: Judicial Fact Discretion (2006) 
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:hrv:faseco:3451304
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Scholarly Articles from Harvard University Department of Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Office for Scholarly Communication ().