What are Tort Awards Really Like? The Untold Story from the State Courts*

The popular press frequently reports exorbitant money damage awards by juries. These stories cause paroxysms in the business community because juries are viewed as favoring plaintiffs over corporations. A growing body of literature has examined aspects of this complex issue, but within a limited framework. Prior studies, which are based on data from the early 1980s or before, tend to focus on federal court cases, primarily product liability and medical malpractice torts, only jury verdicts, and single jurisdictions when state courts are included. The objective of this article is to contribute to the literature by examining all tort cases reaching either a bench or a jury trial verdict during a sample period in 1989 in twenty-seven general jurisdiction trial courts. Research is organized around three basic questions. What do torts look like? Do particular types of plaintiffs/defendants gain a higher percent of favorable verdicts? When plaintiffs are awarded money damages, what is the importance of litigant status, while controlling for other factors, in influencing the size of the awards? The article begins by describing the landscape of torts - the typical configurations of the contending litigants, the composition of torts by area of law, the types of trials, verdict patterns, and the average size of awards. Basic contours of the landscape reflect the elemental facts that individuals generally are plaintiffs in these cases and the opposite tendency of corporations, insurance companies, and governments to appear as defendants. Next a model is outlined and tested to determine how strongly different possible determinants shape the size of tort awards in the twenty-seven state trial courts. Does the size of the award depend on the configuration of the parties after taking into account the type of tort, the type of trial, the length of disposition time, and the state in which the court is located? The results indicate that the group of variables representing the various pairing of litigants accounts for most of the explained variation in award size. These findings support the notion that the status of the litigants is an important factor in influencing awards. Because the variables representing some of the individual states are also significant, the evidence also suggests no single, uniform pattern applies across all the courts. Instead, the state context shapes the basic parameters of plaintiff and defendant success.     

Exclusionary Reasons and the Explanation of Behaviour

Abstract .
Legal philosophy must consider the way in which laws function as reasons for action. "Simple positivism" considers laws as merely reasons in the balance of reasons. Joseph Raz, as a representative of "sophisticated positivism," argues that laws are exclusionary reasons for action, not merely reasons in the balance of reasons. This paper discusses Raz's arguments for his view. The Functional Argument provides no more reason for positivism than against it. The Phenomenological Argument is best supported by an account of how character traits function in explaining behaviour. But then the distinction between exclusionary reasons and expressive reasons is obliterated. Legal positivism cannot absorb laws as expressive reasons for action. Raz's positivism implies the correctness of an anti-positivistic legal theory.     

DOES DROPPING OUT OF SCHOOL ENHANCE DELINQUENT INVOLVEMENT? RESULTS FROM A LARGE-SCALE NATIONAL PROBABILITY SAMPLE*

This study seeks to improve on previous research on the relationship between dropping out of school and later involvement in delinquency. Using data from the first two waves of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, the analysis addresses two problems with prior studies in this area: (1) By controlling for many variables that may account for observed dropout-delinquency associations, it is possible to explore the possibility that the relationship may be spurious. (2) By examining the effects of different reasons for dropping out, the study avoids the assumption that dropouts are a homogeneous group. Results indicate that the effect of dropping out of school on later offending is more complicated than previous research leads one to believe. In addition, dropping out does not always enhance the likelihood of a person's later delinquent involvement.     

The Fly Ball Effect: A Theoretical Framework for Understanding the Impacts of Short‐Term Seed Grants

The federal government has long used grants‐in‐aid to encourage state and local governments to carry out federal policies. Little research has been done that examines how short‐term seed grants affect program continuation. We propose the “fly ball effect” as a theoretical framework for understanding how seed money should impact program maintenance. Our theory suggests that short‐term seed grants by themselves should result in considerable funding uncertainty and program eliminations or stagnation once the initial grant money expires. We use data from drug court start‐ups in four states to provide empirical support for our theory. We argue that understanding the logic of the fly ball effect can help granting governments to improve the effectiveness of their grant funding systems, at least as measured by strong program continuation and expansion.     

THE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INITIATIVE IN THE FCO

This article focuses on the Diplomatic Wing of the Foreign and Commonwealth office (FCO) in this country and diplomatic missions overseas. The Overseas Development Administration, though brigaded with the Diplomatic Wing under the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, is substantially a separate organization staffed by Home Civil Servants and with its own Accounting Officer. Though we work closely together, the organizations are distinct.     

Transnational Communities and the Concept of Law

Abstract. The proliferation of forms of transnational regulation, often unclear in their relation to the law of nation states but also, in some cases, claiming authority as “law,” suggests that the concept of law should be reconsidered in the light of processes associated with globalisation. This article identifies matters to be taken into account in any such reconsideration: in particular, ideas of legal pluralism, of degrees of legalisation, and of relative legal authority. Regulatory authority should be seen as ultimately based in the diverse moral conditions of the networks of community which regulation serves.