A Dynamic Model of Lawsuit Joinder and Settlement

A. Daughety, Jennifer F. Reinganum
{"title":"A Dynamic Model of Lawsuit Joinder and Settlement","authors":"A. Daughety, Jennifer F. Reinganum","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1446904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper we examine a dynamic model of the process by which multiple related lawsuits may be filed and combined; we also examine actions a defendant may employ that may disrupt the formation of a joint suit. Our initial model involves two potential plaintiffs, with private information about the harm they have suffered, in a multi-period setting with positive costs of filing a suit. If two plaintiffs file, they join their suits to obtain a lower per-plaintiff trial cost and a higher likelihood of prevailing against the defendant. We find that some plaintiff types never file, some wait to see if another victim files and only then file, some file early and then drop their suits if not joined by another victim and, finally, some file and pursue their suits whether or not they are joined; thus, the equilibrium resembles a \"bandwagon.\" We then consider the effect of allowing preemptive settlement offers by the defendant aimed at discouraging follow-on suits. Preemptive settlement results in a \"gold rush\" of cases into the first period. In general, plaintiffs (ex ante) strictly prefer that such preemptive settlements not be allowed, and computational results suggest this may be broadly true for defendants as well; however, the inability of defendants to commit to such a policy results in an equilibrium with preemptive settlement. Finally, we consider partial unawareness of victims as to the source of harm; this provides a role for plaintiffs' attorneys, who may seek additional victims to join a combined lawsuit. Confidential preemptive settlements in the case of partial unawareness restrict the plaintiff's attorney from seeking additional victims and therefore leads to higher preemptive settlement amounts. Moreover, the defendant strictly prefers to employ preemptive settlement if the fraction of unaware victims is sufficiently high.","PeriodicalId":168354,"journal":{"name":"Torts & Products Liability Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Torts & Products Liability Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1446904","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

In this paper we examine a dynamic model of the process by which multiple related lawsuits may be filed and combined; we also examine actions a defendant may employ that may disrupt the formation of a joint suit. Our initial model involves two potential plaintiffs, with private information about the harm they have suffered, in a multi-period setting with positive costs of filing a suit. If two plaintiffs file, they join their suits to obtain a lower per-plaintiff trial cost and a higher likelihood of prevailing against the defendant. We find that some plaintiff types never file, some wait to see if another victim files and only then file, some file early and then drop their suits if not joined by another victim and, finally, some file and pursue their suits whether or not they are joined; thus, the equilibrium resembles a "bandwagon." We then consider the effect of allowing preemptive settlement offers by the defendant aimed at discouraging follow-on suits. Preemptive settlement results in a "gold rush" of cases into the first period. In general, plaintiffs (ex ante) strictly prefer that such preemptive settlements not be allowed, and computational results suggest this may be broadly true for defendants as well; however, the inability of defendants to commit to such a policy results in an equilibrium with preemptive settlement. Finally, we consider partial unawareness of victims as to the source of harm; this provides a role for plaintiffs' attorneys, who may seek additional victims to join a combined lawsuit. Confidential preemptive settlements in the case of partial unawareness restrict the plaintiff's attorney from seeking additional victims and therefore leads to higher preemptive settlement amounts. Moreover, the defendant strictly prefers to employ preemptive settlement if the fraction of unaware victims is sufficiently high.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
诉讼竞合与和解的动态模型
在本文中,我们研究了多个相关诉讼可能被提起和合并的过程的动态模型;我们还审查被告可能采取的可能破坏共同诉讼形成的行动。我们最初的模型涉及两个潜在的原告,他们有关于他们所遭受的伤害的私人信息,在一个多时期的背景下,提起诉讼的成本是正的。如果两个原告提起诉讼,他们会联合诉讼,以获得更低的原告人均审判成本和更高的胜诉可能性。我们发现,有些原告类型从不提起诉讼,有些人等着看另一个受害者是否提起诉讼,然后才提起诉讼,有些人提前提起诉讼,但如果没有另一个受害者加入,他们就放弃了诉讼,最后,有些人提起诉讼,不管他们是否加入;因此,均衡类似于“潮流”。然后,我们考虑允许被告提出先发制人的和解提议以阻止后续诉讼的影响。先发制人的和解导致了第一期案件的“淘金热”。一般来说,原告(事前)严格倾向于不允许这种先发制人的和解,计算结果表明,这对被告来说也可能是普遍正确的;然而,被告无法承诺这样的政策导致了先发制人解决的平衡。最后,我们考虑受害者对伤害来源的部分不了解;这为原告律师提供了一个角色,他们可以寻求更多的受害者加入联合诉讼。在部分不知情的情况下,保密的先发制人的和解限制了原告律师寻求更多的受害者,因此导致更高的先发制人的和解金额。此外,如果不知情的受害者比例足够高,被告严格倾向于采用先发制人的解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Dynamic Model of Lawsuit Joinder and Settlement Quantitative Proof of Reputational Harm Injuries, Damages and a Puzzle: Can an Effect Ever Precede its Cause Efficiency, Fairness, and the Economic Analysis of Tort Law Fault at the Contract-Tort Interface
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1