Civil Juries and Civil Justice Psychological and Legal Perspectives [Paperback]

At last, here is an empirical volume that addresses head-on the thorny issue of tort reform in the US. Ongoing policy debates regarding tort reform have led both legal analysts and empirical researchers to reevaluate the civil jurys role in meting out civil justice. Some reform advocates have called for removing certain types of more complex cases from the jurys purview; yet much of the policy debate has proceeded in the absence of data on what the effects of such reforms would be. In addressing these issues, this crucial work takes an empirical approach, relying on archival and experimental data. It stands at the vanguard of the debate and provides information relevant to both state and national civil justice systems.

This work seeks to provide answers on tort reform where thus far there have mainly been just questions. A number of post-reform studies have demonstrated that tort reform may not have the desired effects. This important work takes an empirical approach to addressing the issues.

From Merck to McDonalds to Firestone, high-profile tort cases inspire high-powered tort reform debate. Simultaneously they fuel public perceptions of spurious claims and outlandish awards, while fostering professional perceptions of an unwieldy legal system. The contributors to Civil Juries and Civil Justice bring order, as well as a much-needed reality check, to the situation. This insightful, multidisciplinary volume provides in-depth case data, empirical findings, and original research, synthesizing a range of seemingly irreconcilable legal and psychological viewpoints. Leading scholars consider the roots of juryphobia, the growth trajectories of damage awards, alternative means of obtaining civil justice, and the role of the social sciences in formulating legal policy while addressing these key questions of the tort reform controversy:

• What can be learned by studying jurls&