Show simple item record

Punitive Damages: How Judges and Juries Perform

dc.contributor.authorHersch, Joni, 1956-
dc.contributor.authorViscusi, W. Kip
dc.identifier.citation33 Journal of Legal Studies 1 (2004)en_US
dc.descriptionarticle published in law journalen_US
dc.description.abstractThis paper presents the first empirical anatysis that demonstrates that juries differ from judges in awarding punitive damages. Our review of punitive damages awards of $100 million or more identified 63 such awards, of which juries made 95 percent. These jury awards are highly unpredictable and are not significantly correlated with compensatory damages. Using data on jury and bench verdicts from the Civil Justice Survey of State Courts, 1996, we find that juries are significantly more likely to award punitive damages than are judges and award higher levels of punitive damages. Jury awards are also less strongly related to compensatory damages. The differential effect of juries is most pronounced among the largest awards. Juries also tend to award higher levels of compensatory damages, which in turn boost the punitive damages award. The findings are robust with respect to controlling for self-selection of jury or bench trial.en_US
dc.format.extent1 PDF (37 pages)en_US
dc.publisherJournal of Legal Studiesen_US
dc.subject.lcshExemplary damages -- United States -- Statisticsen_US
dc.subject.lcshDamages -- United States -- Statisticsen_US
dc.subject.lcshExemplary damages -- United States -- Decision makingen_US
dc.titlePunitive Damages: How Judges and Juries Performen_US

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record