So the verdict is in—What Happens Next? The Continuing Story of Tort Awards in the State Courts

Abstract

For both scholars who seek to understand the civil litigation process and reformers who seek to change the civil justice system, decisions by juries are a central focus of attention. Juries have assumed a special significance because they often are viewed as the ultimate arbiters of civil disputes. Yet, this conceptualization is but one chapter in the continuing story. Posttrial negotiation and litigation offer clear means to challenge the trial court verdict and are pursued in a sizable number of cases. This article expands our knowledge of the litigation process by clarifying the relationship between cases that end following the trial court verdict and those that undertake some form of posttrial activity. Using data on bench and jury trials from 27 state trial courts of general jurisdiction, quantitative methods are used to distinguish the characteristics of cases that accept the trial court judgment from those cases that settle following the verdict and from those cases that initiate appeals. In the area of tort litigation, a complete understanding of what happens to cases tried to judgment in trial courts is especially important given the focus on verdicts and awards both in the literature and in the national policy debate.