Harnessing Adversarial Process: Optimal Strategic Complementarities in Litigation
27 Pages Posted: 4 Feb 2005
Date Written: February 2005
Abstract
This paper studies the evidence production game in adversarial litigation, wherein litigating parties choose how much to spend amassing evidence for their side. The payoff structure of this game is such that one party strategically complements (i.e. mimics her opponent's advances and retreats) while the other strategically substitutes (i.e., does the opposite of her opponent). Which party plays which role depends on how litigation is structured. The question thus arises: should litigation be designed to induce the plaintiff to complement and the defendant to substitute, or vice versa? The paper argues that the answer depends on whether and whose primary activity incentives are being set by the particular evidentiary contest in question. Within each subsidiary evidentiary contest, the "incentive target" should be induced to complement and her adversary to substitute. In some cases the defendant will be the incentive target, as when the issue is the defendant's negligence or contractual breach. In other cases, the plaintiff will be the target, as when the defendant defends by claiming that the plaintiff has been "contributorily negligent" or has herself failed to meet a prior contractual obligation. These results resonate with current law. (A companion paper A Primary Activity Approach to Proof Burdens applies these results to the problem of allocating the burden of proof.)
Keywords: Evidence, procedure, litigation, adversarial process, strategic complementarities, burden of proof, contributory negligence
JEL Classification: K4, K40, K41, K12, K13, D82
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
On the Economics of Trials: Adversarial Process, Evidence and Equilibrium Bias
-
Accuracy in the Assessment of Damages
By Louis Kaplow and Steven Shavell
-
A Theory of Legal Presumptions
By Antonio E. Bernardo, Eric L. Talley, ...
-
A Theory of Legal Presumptions
By Antonio E. Bernardo, Eric L. Talley, ...
-
The Burden of Proof in Civil Litigation: A Simple Model of Mechanism Design
-
Scale Economies and Synergies in Horizontal Merger Analysis
By Joseph Farrell and Carl Shapiro
-
Enforcement by Hearing: An Integrated Model of Evidence Production
-
Evidence Production in Adversarial vs. Inquisitorial Regimes
By Luke M. Froeb and Bruce H. Kobayashi