Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Behavioral law and economics (5)
- Legal Theory (5)
- Juries (4)
- Empirical Projects (3)
- Paternalism (3)
-
- Common Law and Securities Fraud (2)
- Law and economics (2)
- Rationality (2)
- Advertising (1)
- Behavioral (1)
- Behavioral economics (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Consumption (1)
- Contract (1)
- Corporate Law (1)
- Cost benefit analysis (1)
- Criminal law (1)
- Cultural cognition (1)
- Disclosure (1)
- Dockets (1)
- Duties (1)
- Duty of care (1)
- Empirical (1)
- Enterprise liability (1)
- Fairness (1)
- Fraud (1)
- Gender (1)
- Hierarchical (1)
- Judges (1)
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Docketology, District Courts, And Doctrine, David A. Hoffman, Alan J. Izenman, Jeffrey R. Lidicker
Docketology, District Courts, And Doctrine, David A. Hoffman, Alan J. Izenman, Jeffrey R. Lidicker
David A Hoffman
Empirical legal scholars have traditionally modeled judicial opinion writing by assuming that judges act rationally, seeking to maximize their influence by writing opinions in politically important cases. Support for this hypothesis has reviewed published opinions, finding that civil rights and other “hot” topics are more to be discussed than other issues. This orthodoxy comforts consumers of legal opinions, because it suggests that opinions are largely representative of judicial work. The orthodoxy is substantively and methodologically flawed. This paper starts by assuming that judges are generally risk averse with respect to reversal, and that they provide opinions when they believe that …
Whose Eyes Are You Going To Believe: Scott V. Harris And The Perils Of Cognitive Illiberalism, Dan Kahan, David A. Hoffman, Don Braman
Whose Eyes Are You Going To Believe: Scott V. Harris And The Perils Of Cognitive Illiberalism, Dan Kahan, David A. Hoffman, Don Braman
David A Hoffman
This paper accepts the unusual invitation to see for yourself issued by the Supreme Court in Scott v. Harris, 127 S. Ct. 1769 (2007). Scott held that a police officer did not violate the Fourth Amendment when he deliberately rammed his car into that of a fleeing motorist who refused to pull over for speeding and instead attempted to evade the police in a high-speed chase. The majority did not attempt to rebut the arguments of the single Justice who disagreed with its conclusion that no reasonable juror could find the fleeing driver did not pose a deadly risk to …
Self-Handicapping And Managers' Duty Of Care, David A. Hoffman
Self-Handicapping And Managers' Duty Of Care, David A. Hoffman
David A Hoffman
This symposium essay focuses on the relationship between managers’ duty of care and self-handicapping, or constructing obstacles to performance with the goal of influencing subsequent explanations about outcomes. Conventional explanations for failures of caretaking by managers have focused on motives (greed) and incentives (agency costs). This account of manager behavior has led some modern jurists, concerned about recent corporate scandals, to advocate for stronger deterrent measures to realign manager and shareholder incentives. Self-handicapping theory, by contrast, teaches that bad manager behavior may occur even when incentives are well-aligned. Highly successful individuals in particular come to fear the pressure of replicating …
The Best Puffery Article Ever, David A. Hoffman
The Best Puffery Article Ever, David A. Hoffman
David A Hoffman
This Article provides the first extensive legal treatment of an important defense in the law of fraud and contracts: puffery. Legal authorities commonly say they make decisions about whether defendants should be able to utter exaggerated, optimistic, lies based on assumptions about buyer behavior, concluding that consumers do not rely on such speech. However, as the Article shows, such analyses are proxies for a deeper analytical question: does the speech encourage or discourage a type of consumption activity that the court deems welfare maximizing? The Article presents a novel constitutional analysis of puffery doctrine that focuses on the meaning of …
The "Duty" To Be A Rational Shareholder, David A. Hoffman
The "Duty" To Be A Rational Shareholder, David A. Hoffman
David A Hoffman
How and when do courts determine that corporate disclosures are actionable under the federal securities laws? The applicable standard is materiality: would a (mythical) reasonable investor have considered a given disclosure important. As I establish through empirical and statistical testing of approximately 500 cases analyzing the materiality standard, judicial findings of immateriality are remarkably common, and have been stable over time. Materiality's scope results in the dismissal of a large number of claims, and creates a set of cases in which courts attempt to explain and defend their vision of who is, and is not, a reasonable investor. Thus, materiality …
Nullificatory Juries, David A. Hoffman, Kaimipono D. Wenger
Nullificatory Juries, David A. Hoffman, Kaimipono D. Wenger
David A Hoffman
In this Article, we argue that current debates on the legitimacy of punitive damages would benefit from a comparison with jury nullification in criminal trials. We discuss critiques of punitive damages and of jury nullification, noting the surprising similarities in the arguments scholars use to attack these (superficially) distinct outcomes of the jury guarantee. Not only are the criticisms alike, the institutions of punitive damages and jury nullification also turn out to have many similarities: both are, we suggest, examples of what we call "nullificatory juries." We discuss the features of such juries, and consider recent behavioral data relating to …
How Relevant Is Jury Rationality?, David A. Hoffman
How Relevant Is Jury Rationality?, David A. Hoffman
David A Hoffman
This essay reviews "Punitive Damages: How Juries Decide" by Cass Sunstein, et al. The book provides a good example of a recent trend: the use of behavioralist research to justify surprisingly paternalistic legal reforms. While critics of behavioralism often contend that its theoretical foundations are weak, this approach is unlikely to prove an effective rejoinder in the new debate about what kinds of paternalism are made permissible by human "irrationality". A better approach: (1) notes the lack of a nexus between behavioralism and the supposed emergent necessity of paternalist reforms; and (2) suggests that juror unwillingness to apply cost-benefit formula …
Can Law And Economics Be Both Practical And Principled?, David A. Hoffman, Michael P. O'Shea
Can Law And Economics Be Both Practical And Principled?, David A. Hoffman, Michael P. O'Shea
David A Hoffman
This article describes important recent developments in normative law and economics, and the difficulties they create for the project of efficiency-based legal reform. After long proceeding without a well articulated moral justification for using economic decision procedures to choose legal rules, scholars have lately begun to devote serious attention to developing a philosophically attractive definition of well-being. At the same time, the empirical side of law and economics is also being enriched with an improved understanding of the complexities of individuals' decision-making behavior. That is where the problems begin. Scholars may have better, more plausible conceptions of well-being in hand, …