The Relationship of Alternative Negligence Rules to Litigation Behavior and Tort Claim Disposition

Recently most states have abandoned the traditional tort defense of contributory negligence and substituted a form of comparative negligence. Using an extensive data set of auto accident injury claims, we provide evidence on the relationship between negligence rules and claimants' litigation decisions to retain attorneys, file lawsuits and litigate versus settle out of court. Litigation choices appear to be rational responses to the varying incentives created by alternative tort standards. We find that in contrast to comparative negligence, claims arising under comparative negligence are associated with greater probabilities of attorney involvement, higher average award levels, and longer delays in securing payment. Only 37% of claims involving attorneys in contributory negligence states result in a lawsuit being filed compared to 49% and 47% under the pure and modified forms of comparative negligence, respectively. The study provides the first statistical evidence on the litigation costs of the new forms of comparative negligence.     

Time and academic achievement

In questionnaire and achievement-test data from 1584 seventh- and ninth-grade students, relationships between academic achievement and amounts of time devoted to various uses related to school, family, peers, and the mass media are examined, with relevant demographic factors controlled. Multiple regression analyses support hypotheses of (a) a negative relationship among ninth graders between achievement and time spent listening to radio and records, (c) an interaction between parental occupation and time spent watching television, with trends toward positive association between achievement and TV time when occupational status is low and negative association when it is high, and (d) a positive relationship between reading and overall achievement and time spent on leisure reading. Hypotheses of positive relationships between achievement and time spent on homework in this age range and mere time spent with the parent receive no support. The relationship between achievement and time spent on household chores is explored without a hypothesis, and the relationship is found to be negative. The findings are discussed in terms of the impact of the adolescent subculture and in terms of the family, school, peer group, and mass media as agencies of socialization relevant to academic achievement.Professor Smith has a Ph.D. in sociology and a history of research on parental influence and parent-adolescent relations. Currently, he is conducting research on the antecedents of academic achievement.     

The case of Ohio v. Robinson. An 1870 bite mark case

In 1870, Ansil L. Robinson was charged with the murder of his mistress, Mary Lunsford, in Mansfield, Ohio, U.S.A. Evidence against Robinson included an attempt to match his teeth to bite marks on the victim's arm. Robinson was acquitted after a 3-week trial despite the evidence linking his teeth to the wounds. This trial represents an early and perhaps the first attempt to admit bite-mark evidence in a court of law in the United States. The acquittal resulted in the obscurity that prevented this case from coming to the awareness of the forensic dental and legal communities sooner.     

Public versus private ownership: The federal lands case

“Privatization” of public lands has been urged on the grounds that it will provide a more efficient allocation of the nation's resources. However, there are some public policy objectives which private ownership and free markets are not equipped to achieve. Historically, these objectives have motivated legislation authorizing retention of some land in public ownership. Indeed, land in both forms of ownership is required to achieve a full range of both public and private goods and services. However, since inefficiencies in the allocation of resources will occur under either form of ownership, careful monitoring of economic activities in both sectors is more likely to achieve improvements than arguing for exclusive reliance on only one system of property rights.