IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/amerec/v43y1999i2p81-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economics and the Law: Where is There Consensus?

Author

Listed:
  • John Moorhouse
  • Andrew Morriss
  • Robert Whaples

Abstract

We investigate where consensus exists in the field of Economics and the Law by analyzing responses to a questionnaire mailed to members of the American Law and Economics Association. These specialists are impressed by the efficiency of the common law, while few believe that the jury system is efficient. Fifty-nine percent conclude that there are currently too many attorneys in the U.S. Forty-one percent believe that there are about the right number—none think that there are too few. Among the other issues in the survey are precedent, contract law, litigation abuse, negligence, nuisance, punitive damages, no-fault auto insurance, product liability, contingency fees, losers paying for civil litigation, compensation for regulatory takings, privacy rights, and the economics of crime and punishment.

Suggested Citation

  • John Moorhouse & Andrew Morriss & Robert Whaples, 1999. "Economics and the Law: Where is There Consensus?," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 43(2), pages 81-88, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:amerec:v:43:y:1999:i:2:p:81-88
    DOI: 10.1177/056943459904300209
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/056943459904300209
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/056943459904300209?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shavell, Steven, 1995. "The Appeals Process as a Means of Error Correction," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(2), pages 379-426, June.
    2. Alston, Richard M & Kearl, J R & Vaughan, Michael B, 1992. "Is There a Consensus among Economists in the 1990's?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(2), pages 203-209, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Arruñada Benito & Andonova Veneta, 2008. "Judges' Cognition and Market Order," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 665-692, December.
    2. Benito Arruñada & Veneta Andonova, 2008. "Market Institutions and Judicial Rulemaking," Springer Books, in: Claude Ménard & Mary M. Shirley (ed.), Handbook of New Institutional Economics, chapter 10, pages 229-250, Springer.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Blair Jenkins, 2009. "Rent Control: Do Economists Agree?," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 6(1), pages 73-112, January.
    2. Roy Gava, 2022. "Challenging the regulators: Enforcement and appeals in financial regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 1265-1282, October.
    3. Chen, Ruoyu & Jiang, Hanchen & Quintero, Luis E., 2023. "Measuring the value of rent stabilization and understanding its implications for racial inequality: Evidence from New York City," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    4. Murphy, Frederic & Pierru, Axel & Smeers, Yves, 2019. "Measuring the effects of price controls using mixed complementarity models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 666-676.
    5. Aspasia Tsaoussi & Eleni Zervogianni, 2010. "Judges as satisficers: a law and economics perspective on judicial liability," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 333-357, June.
    6. Hui Li & Yijin Kim & Kannan Srinivasan, 2022. "Market Shifts in the Sharing Economy: The Impact of Airbnb on Housing Rentals," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(11), pages 8015-8044, November.
    7. Marina Riem, 2017. "Essays on the Behavior of Firms and Politicians," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 73.
    8. Roger Gordon & Gordon B. Dahl, 2013. "Views among Economists: Professional Consensus or Point-Counterpoint?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(3), pages 629-635, May.
    9. Thomas Mayer, 1998. "Indexed Bonds And Heterogeneous Agents," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 16(1), pages 77-84, January.
    10. Leonardo Felli & Alessandro Riboni & Luca Anderlini, 2007. "Statute Law or Case Law?," 2007 Meeting Papers 952, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    11. Sarel, Roee & Demirtas, Melanie, 2021. "Delegation in a multi-tier court system: Are remands in the U.S. federal courts driven by moral hazard?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    12. Santolino, Miguel, 2010. "Determinants of the decision to appeal against motor bodily injury judgements made by Spanish trial courts," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 37-45, March.
    13. Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2019. "Values of Economists Matter in the Art and Science of Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 472-499, August.
    14. Pierre Bentata & Romain Espinosa & Yolande Hiriart, 2019. "Correction Activities by France’s Supreme Courts and Control over their Dockets," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 129(2), pages 169-204.
    15. Bertrand Chopard & Edwige Marion & Ludivine Roussey, 2014. "Does the Appeals Process Lower the Occurrence of Legal Errors?," EconomiX Working Papers 2014-43, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    16. Dai, Chifeng, 2009. "The appeals process in principal-agent relationships," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 451-462, August.
    17. O’Neill, Donal, 2015. "Divided opinion on the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2013: Random or systematic differences?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 175-178.
    18. Chopard Bertrand & Fain Edwige & Roussey Ludivine, 2018. "Does the Appeals Process Reduce the Occurrence of Legal Errors?," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(2), pages 1-18, July.
    19. Ho Fai Chan & Bruno S. Frey & Jana Gallus & Markus Schaffner & Benno Torgler & Stephen Whyte, 2016. "External Influence as an Indicator of Scholarly Importance," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 62(1), pages 170-195.
    20. At Christian & Friehe Tim & Gabuthy Yannick, 2019. "On Lawyer Compensation When Appeals Are Possible," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 19(2), pages 1-11, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:amerec:v:43:y:1999:i:2:p:81-88. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://journals.sagepub.com/home/aex .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.