LEADER 04962nam 2200661Ia 450 001 9910455616403321 005 20200520144314.0 010 $a1-282-53784-9 010 $a9786612537844 010 $a0-226-78016-3 024 7 $a10.7208/9780226780160 035 $a(CKB)2520000000006490 035 $a(EBL)496603 035 $a(OCoLC)593359766 035 $a(SSID)ssj0000341998 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)11947735 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000341998 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)10285602 035 $a(PQKB)10095013 035 $a(StDuBDS)EDZ0000122535 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC496603 035 $a(DE-B1597)524650 035 $a(DE-B1597)9780226780160 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL496603 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10372058 035 $a(CaONFJC)MIL253784 035 $a(EXLCZ)992520000000006490 100 $a20020124d2002 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur|n|---||||| 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 00$aPunitive damages$b[electronic resource] $ehow juries decide /$fCass R. Sunstein, W. Kip Viscusi ... [et al.]; with an introduction by George L. Priest 210 $aChicago $cUniversity of Chicago Press$d2002 215 $a1 online resource (299 p.) 300 $aDescription based upon print version of record. 311 $a0-226-78015-5 311 $a0-226-78014-7 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references. 327 $tFrontmatter -- $tContents -- $tPreface and Acknowledgments -- $tIntroduction: The Problem and Efforts to Understand It -- $t1. Overview: What We Did and What We Found -- $tIntroduction -- $t2. Shared Outrage, Erratic Awards -- $t3. Deliberating about Dollars: The Severity Shift -- $t4. Do Plaintiffs' Requests and Plaintiffs' Identities Matter? -- $tIntroduction -- $t5. Judging Corporate Recklessness -- $t6 Looking Backward in Punitive Judgments: 20-20 Vision? -- $tIntroduction -- $t7. Corporate Risk Analysis: A Reckless Act? -- $t8. Do People Want Optimal Deterrence? -- $t9. Deterrence Instructions: What Jurors Won't Do -- $t10. Judging Risk and Recklessness -- $t12. Putting It All Together -- $t13. What Should Be Done? -- $tAppendix: Judge's Instructions -- $tGlossary -- $tBibliography -- $tContributors -- $tIndex 330 $aOver the past two decades, the United States has seen a dramatic increase in the number and magnitude of punitive damages verdicts rendered by juries in civil trials. Probably the most extraordinary example is the July 2000 award of $144.8 billion in the Florida class action lawsuit brought against cigarette manufacturers. Or consider two recent verdicts against the auto manufacturer BMW in Alabama. In identical cases, argued in the same court before the same judge, one jury awarded $4million in punitive damages, while the other awarded no punitive damages at all. In cases involving accidents, civil rights, and the environment, multimillion-dollar punitive awards have been a subject of intense controversy. But how do juries actually make decisions about punitive damages? To find out, the authors-experts in psychology, economics, and the law-present the results of controlled experiments with more than 600 mock juries involving the responses of more than 8,000 jury-eligible citizens. Although juries tended to agree in their moral judgments about the defendant's conduct, they rendered erratic and unpredictable dollar awards. The experiments also showed that instead of moderating juror verdicts, the process of jury deliberation produced a striking "severity shift" toward ever-higher awards. Jurors also tended to ignore instructions from the judges; were influenced by whatever amount the plaintiff happened to request; showed "hindsight bias," believing that what happened should have been foreseen; and penalized corporations that had based their decisions on careful cost-benefit analyses. While judges made many of the same errors, they performed better in some areas, suggesting that judges (or other specialists) may be better equipped than juries to decide punitive damages. Using a wealth of new experimental data, and offering a host of provocative findings, this book documents a wide range of systematic biases in jury behavior. It will be indispensable for anyone interested not only in punitive damages, but also jury behavior, psychology, and how people think about punishment. 606 $aExemplary damages$zUnited States 606 $aJury$zUnited States$xDecision making 608 $aElectronic books. 615 0$aExemplary damages 615 0$aJury$xDecision making. 676 $a347.73 700 $aSunstein$b Cass R., $4aut$4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut$0145553 701 $aSunstein$b Cass R 701 $aViscusi$b W. Kip$089612 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910455616403321 996 $aPunitive damages$92036807 997 $aUNINA