Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Empirical legal studies (2)
- Bronx effect (1)
- CAFE standards (1)
- CJP (1)
- Capital Jury Project (1)
-
- Capital punishment (1)
- Cornell Death Penalty Project (1)
- Corporate average fuel economy (1)
- EPCA (1)
- Endangered Species Act (1)
- Energy Policy and Conservation Act (1)
- Executive clemency (1)
- FCC (1)
- Fairness doctrine (1)
- Federal Communications Commission (1)
- Hate crime laws (1)
- Law and policy (1)
- Lawmaking challenges (1)
- Legal backfire claims (1)
- PIJ (1)
- Population demographics and jury trial outcomes (1)
- Predictably Incoherent Judgments (1)
- Proportionality review (1)
- Punitive damages awards (1)
- Race effects in civil trial awards (1)
- South Carolina death penalty (1)
- South Carolina death sentences (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Rhetoric Of Legal Backfire, Robert A. Hillman
The Rhetoric Of Legal Backfire, Robert A. Hillman
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
This Article focuses on legal backfire claims. A claim of legal backfire constitutes the position that a law produces or will produce results directly contrary to one or more of those intended. Legal backfire claims are pervasive, yet potentially misleading and harmful argumentation used primarily to undermine existing law (or policy) or to forestall the enactment of new law. This Article analyzes many examples of legal backfire to suggest that the concept is often a rhetorical strategy for opposing the promulgation of new law or policy or for attempting to have existing law rolled back, and that actual legal backfires …
Reconciling Experimental Incoherence With Real-World Coherence In Punitive Damages, Theodore Eisenberg, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, Martin T. Wells
Reconciling Experimental Incoherence With Real-World Coherence In Punitive Damages, Theodore Eisenberg, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, Martin T. Wells
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
Experimental evidence generated in controlled laboratory studies suggests that the legal system in general, and punitive damages awards in particular, should display an incoherent pattern. According to the prediction, inexperienced decisionmakers, such as juries, should fail to convert their qualitative judgments of defendants' conduct into consistent, meaningful dollar amounts. This Article tests this prediction and finds modest support for the thesis that experience across different types of cases will lead to greater consistency in awards. Despite this support, numerous studies of damage awards in real cases detect a generally sensible pattern of damage awards. This Article tries to reconcile the …
Trial Outcomes And Demographics: Is There A Bronx Effect?, Theodore Eisenberg, Martin T. Wells
Trial Outcomes And Demographics: Is There A Bronx Effect?, Theodore Eisenberg, Martin T. Wells
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
Minorities favor injured plaintiffs and give them inflated awards. This folk wisdom in the legal community influences choice of trial locale and the screening of jurors. A Los Angeles court is said to be known by local lawyers as "the bank" because of the frequency and size of its anti-corporate awards. A newspaper article summarizing court results suggests, somewhat jokingly, that the "Bronx County Courthouse should post a warning: People who get sued here run an increased risk of suffering staggering losses." Beliefs about the influence of factors other than race, such as income and urbanization, also are common.
This …
Twenty-Five Years Of Death: A Report Of The Cornell Death Penalty Project On The "Modern" Era Of Capital Punishment In South Carolina, John H. Blume
Twenty-Five Years Of Death: A Report Of The Cornell Death Penalty Project On The "Modern" Era Of Capital Punishment In South Carolina, John H. Blume
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
In 1972, the United States Supreme Court determined that the death penalty, as then administered in this country, violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Many states, including South Carolina, scurried to enact new, "improved" capital punishment statutes which would satisfy the Supreme Court's rather vague mandate. In 1976, the High Court approved some of the new laws, and the American death penalty was back in business. After a wrong turn or two, including a statutory scheme which did not pass constitutional muster, the South Carolina General Assembly passed the current death penalty statute in 1977. The …