Litigation Behavior Research Articles

Geographical proximity to government and corporate litigation behavior: Evidence from China

This study examines the impact of geographical proximity to government agencies on corporate litigation activities. Utilizing an extensive dataset comprising corporate lawsuits and government relocations spanning two decades (1998–2018), a difference-in-differences approach was implemented to explore the causal nexus between the distance of local governments from firm headquarters and judicial engagement. The empirical evidence reveals that closer proximity to local governments significantly reduces the judicial participation of firms. Moreover, the effect is spatially attenuated, with a stronger impact on firms located nearer to local governments. Our mechanism analysis suggests that geographical proximity strengthens the value of information communication between the government and enterprises, increasing the attention of companies towards government actions and reducing the impact of policy uncertainty, thereby making it possible to adopt dispute resolution mechanisms other than litigation. Meanwhile, the political favoritism exhibited by the government after becoming closer also to some extent suppresses the enthusiasm of companies to participate in judicial proceedings.

虚假诉讼罪研究：以“虚假诉讼行为”为视角

虚假诉讼罪研究：以“虚假诉讼行为”为视角

STUDY ON CIVIL LITIGATION PSYCHOLOGY AND LEGAL IDENTITY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF EMOTIONAL BEHAVIOR REGULATION

STUDY ON CIVIL LITIGATION PSYCHOLOGY AND LEGAL IDENTITY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF EMOTIONAL BEHAVIOR REGULATION

Qualitative Study on the Litigant behavior of Advocates in Pakistan

Investigating advocates' litigant conduct is an intriguing goal of the current study. The psychological component of litigant behavior, particularly in advocates, is revealed by this qualitative study. A total sample(N=10) with an equal number of licensed advocates (n=10, 5 men and 5 women) was purposefully chosen. With the aid of earlier literature, the interview protocol—a semi-structured questionnaire—was devised to delve deeply into the litigious behavior of the participants. The extensive interviews were done, recorded on tape, and then written down. Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was utilized to identify themes from the majority of the data in order to determine the litigant behavior.

The Effect of Patent Litigation Insurance: Theory and Evidence from NPEs

Abstract We analyze the extent to which private defensive litigation insurance deters patent assertion by non-practicing entities (NPEs). We study the effect that a patent-specific defensive insurance product, offered by a leading litigation insurer, had on the litigation behavior of insured patents’ owners, all of which are NPEs. We first model the impact of defensive litigation insurance on the behavior of patent enforcers and accused infringers. We show that the availability of defensive litigation insurance can have an effect on how often patent enforcers will assert their patents. We confirm this result empirically showing that the insurance policy had a large, negative effect on the likelihood that a patent included in the policy was subsequently asserted relative to other patents held by the same NPEs and relative to patents held by other NPEs with portfolios that were entirely excluded from the insurance product. Our findings suggest that market-based mechanisms can deter so-called “patent trolling.” (JEL: G22, K41, O34)

Professional responsibility and the defence of extractive corporations in transnational human rights and environmental litigation in Canadian courts

ABSTRACT Lawyers defending extractive corporations in transnational human rights and environmental cases tend to reflect the dominant ‘resolute advocacy’ model of litigation, which directs lawyers to aggressively pursue clients’ interests though all available means. Is a different vision of advocacy more appropriate in this context? In answering this question, we look to the rule of law foundation of the ‘resolute advocacy’ model and note the ways in which rationales for aggressive litigation behaviour are pragmatic, contextual and contingent. From this observation, we propose a model of ‘moderated resolute advocacy’. We ground this claim in the background context generated by the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the Sustainable Development Goals and in the barriers that plaintiffs face. The model we propose would not only emphasise existing obligations on lawyers not to generate unreasonable costs, create undue delay or advance unfounded legal claims but also promote an approach to litigation oriented towards the efficient determination of substantive claims on their merits. To operationalise this model, we propose a two-pronged approach that includes the development of a voluntary litigation code of conduct alongside legislative action to remove some of the legal obstacles for plaintiffs bringing these cases.

Judicial Impact and Factual Allegations: How the Supreme Court Changed Civil Procedure through the Plausibility Standard

AbstractResearchers often study the impact of legal change by investigating judges’ decisions and ignoring litigants. Many scholars believe the Supreme Court’s decisions in Twombly and Iqbal increased how specific factual allegations must be to avoid dismissal, but studies generally fail to find an effect. Using text analysis, I find evidence that litigants and their lawyers changed the information they provided after the decisions in certain types of cases. These results call into question prior studies and illustrate the need to consider the behavior of litigants. They also help shed light on issues of access to courts and separation of powers.

International Relations Theory and International Courts and Tribunals

International relations (IR) scholars in political science have historically paid little attention to international courts and tribunals, which were seen through the prevailing realist lens as being of little or no importance in global politics. In recent decades, however, IR scholars have taken up the study of international courts, applying a distinctive set of theoretical lenses to questions about the design, behavior, and independence, and viability of these courts. The aim of this paper is to examine the four core traditions of IR theory as applied to ICTs, and to identify the value-added insights as well as the lacunae of this research. The paper first explores four great traditions in international relations theorizing about international adjudication, focusing in turn on realism, institutionalism, liberalism, and constructivism. Building on this theoretical basis, it identifies four substantive, value-added contributions of political science to the study of international adjudication, which I organize under the rubrics of institutional design, the behavior of litigants, judicial behavior and independence, and the dynamic evolution of international adjudication systems over time, including both positive feedbacks and progressive development as well as negative feedbacks and backlash. A brief final section concludes.

THE JUDGE POSNER’S DOCTRINE AS METHOD TO REFORM THE ITALIAN CIVIL JUSTICE

This article represents a preliminary and methodology-oriented effort to conduct an economic analysis of the Italian civil justice system, commonly perceived as inefficient and proposes a different approach. More specifically, it demonstrates how the failure of several Italian legal reforms was based on methodological errors, which led to the inefficiency of the system itself. Accordingly, it proposes an alternative in methodology. For the mentioned purpose, it shall use the theories and methods studied by Judge Posner concerning the judiciary system. In particular, it shall evaluate if the Posnerian methodology could be applied to the reforms to come from the Italian judiciary system. The evaluation is carried out by assessing the behavior of judges, lawyers, and litigants based on the theory of wealth maximization. We highlight that this article is not intended to give specific solutions to the efficiency issues of Italian civil justice. Nonetheless, these pages contain examples and references that demonstrate how the application of this methodology to various Italian rules of the judiciary system could impact its efficiency. These examples represent the adaptation of Posner's applications into the Italian system, based on his concept of efficiency applied to specific Federal procedural rules concerning judges, lawyers, and litigants.

The Effect of Patent Litigation Insurance: Theory and Evidence from NPEs

We analyze the extent to which private defensive litigation insurance deters assertion by non-practicing entities (NPEs). We study the effect that a patent-specific defensive insurance product, offered by a leading litigation insurer, had on the litigation behavior of insured patents' owners, all of which are NPEs. We first model the impact of defensive litigation insurance on the behavior of enforcers and accused infringers. We show that the availability of defensive litigation insurance can have an effect on how often enforcers will assert their patents. We confirm this result empirically showing that the insurance policy had a large, negative effect on the likelihood that a included in the policy was subsequently asserted relative to other patents held by the same NPEs and relative to patents held by other NPEs with portfolios that were entirely excluded from the insurance product. Our findings suggest that market-based mechanisms can deter so-called patent trolling.

The Effect of Patent Litigation Insurance: Theory and Evidence from NPEs

We analyze the extent to which private defensive litigation insurance deters assertion by non-practicing entities (NPEs). We study the effect that a patent-specific defensive insurance product, offered by a leading litigation insurer, had on the litigation behavior of insured patents' owners, all of which are NPEs. We first model the impact of defensive litigation insurance on the behavior of enforcers and accused infringers. We show that the availability of defensive litigation insurance can have an effect on how often enforcers will assert their patents. We confirm this result empirically showing that the insurance policy had a large, negative effect on the likelihood that a included in the policy was subsequently asserted relative to other patents held by the same NPEs and relative to patents held by other NPEs with portfolios that were entirely excluded from the insurance product. Our findings suggest that market-based mechanisms can deter so-called patent trolling.

On the role of emotions in experimental litigation contests

We present experimental evidence on the influence of emotions on litigation, using a stylized litigation contest in which a potential plaintiff can make a costly effort to regain points that had been transferred to the potential defendant before. In our design, we compare data from a treatment in which any transfer of points happens only when a player decided to take points from the other one (i.e., in which takings are intentional) to data from a treatment in which transfers are initiated by chance (i.e., takings are random events). Takings that are intentional induce negative emotions (e.g., anger), but this emotional arousal does not influence litigant behavior in terms of either filing a case or spending litigation effort. Our observation is independent of litigation being a one-staged or a (possibly) two-staged contest (i.e., one with an appeal).

Uncertainty and Legal Disintegration: Evidence From Brexit

When does uncertainty about continued membership in a highly integrated polity like the European Union (EU) start impacting the behavior of judges and litigants? The Brexit referendum has created uncertainty over the terms of the UK's future relationship with the EU and, in so doing, over the application of EU law and the authority of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the UK legal system. While the UK is still formally part of the EU, we argue that this uncertainty is already discouraging British litigants and judges to invoke EU law and to refer cases to the ECJ. Using data on referral activity from the UK's accession in 1973 up to mid-2018, we apply a difference-in-difference design to evaluate the effect of the Brexit vote on the referral propensity of British courts. We find strong evidence that the Brexit vote is adversely affecting the use of EU law. UK judges are referring 22 per cent fewer references after the vote than did prior to it. With the future relationship between the EU and the UK still in limbo, our analysis suggests that the uncertainty arising from the political process has already begun to unravel the fabric of legal integration.

Bending the law: geometric tools for quantifying influence in the multinetwork of legal opinions

Legal reasoning requires identification through search of authoritative legal texts (such as statutes, constitutions, or prior judicial opinions) that apply to a given legal question. In this paper, using a network representation of US Supreme Court opinions that integrates citation connectivity and topical similarity, we model the activity of law search as an organizing principle in the evolution of the corpus of legal texts. The network model and (parametrized) probabilistic search behavior generates a Pagerank-style ranking of the texts that in turn gives rise to a natural geometry of the opinion corpus. This enables us to then measure the ways in which new judicial opinions affect the topography of the network and its future evolution. While we deploy it here on the US Supreme Court opinion corpus, there are obvious extensions to large evolving bodies of legal text (or text corpora in general). The model is a proxy for the way in which new opinions influence the search behavior of litigants and judges and thus affect the law. This type of “legal search effect” is a new legal consequence of research practice that has not been previously identified in jurisprudential thought and has never before been subject to empirical analysis. We quantitatively estimate the extent of this effect and find significant relationships between search-related network structures and propensity of future citation. This finding indicates that “search influence” is a pathway through which judicial opinions can affect future legal development.

Comparison of Legal Mechanism for Judicial Review of Arbitration Proceedings & Its Reference to China

The appropriateness of legal mechanism for judicial review of arbitration proceedings is very important to the healthy development of arbitration. The objects of judicial review of arbitration proceedings can be mainly divided into issues concerning the breach of agreed arbitration proceedings and ones concerning the breach of mandatory due process requirements, and its statute law not only embodies domestic law or local law, but also has unified binding of international treaties. However, some countries or regions in history or at present make some interpretations that deviate from international mainstream practices. The good news is that this situation is getting less and less and is more and more severely criticized. In terms of statue law that judicial review concerning the breach of mandatory due process requirements of arbitration proceedings is based on, strong arbitration countries or regions not only have prominent principle stipulation, but also have made very detailed and rich case practices in succession and paly the better guidance role in the behavior of related litigants. The legal provisions in China’s Arbitration Law for judicial review of arbitration proceedings are comparatively defective, reflecting unreasonable location of most articles, no clear rules about the rights and freedom for the parties to tailor arbitration proceedings for themselves, incomplete requirements of mandatory due process, and so on. China should revise, delete or add relevant articles in the above-mentionedArbitration Law by mainly referring to overseas advanced legal system.

The Effects of Twombly and Iqbal

Ever since Twombly and Iqbal introduced the doctrine of plausibility pleading, a cottage industry of legal scholars (including myself) has undertaken to detect the effects of Twombly and Iqbal on litigants and case outcomes. Results so far have been equivocal, and it has been hard to make sense of the disparate methodologies and findings. In this article, I develop a comprehensive yet nontechnical framework for empirically testing the effects of Twombly and Iqbal on lower courts and litigants, taking into account a wide range of confounding factors and the numerous ways in which Twombly and Iqbal may have indirectly affected litigant behavior. Using this framework, I test for effects of Twombly and Iqbal on district court and litigant behavior using two datasets—one of administrative data covering over 700,000 cases, and one of detailed, hand‐ and machine‐coded docket and complaint data covering a representative sample of nearly 2,000 cases. I also review existing findings. I find only limited evidence that Twombly and Iqbal, the two most important pleading cases in 50 years, have had a major effect on the behavior of lawyers and judges across all cases. For represented plaintiffs, rates of dismissal with prejudice have held steady, motions to dismiss remain uncommon, and settlement and filing patterns have not changed appreciably in the wake of Twombly and Iqbal. There is, however, some evidence of effects—potentially major effects—on pro se plaintiffs. Further, while case outcomes for represented plaintiffs have been largely unaffected by Twombly and Iqbal, there is evidence that lawyers changed their pleading and motion practice in the wake of those cases.

Estimating the value of generic entry and intellectual property litigation in the pharmaceutical market

In this study, we examine the relationship between, and implications of, the market entry and intellectual property litigation of brand name and generic pharmaceuticals from 2003 to 2012 in Japan. We focus on the effects of a firm’s litigation behavior on market competition, including not only anticipated damage and injunction costs but also reputation and reliability costs. The results show that market entry of generic pharmaceuticals decreases market sales of brand name pharmaceuticals by 45%. However, in the case of intellectual property rights, litigation increases market sales of branded pharmaceuticals by 120%.

Perceptions of patient-centred care at public hospitals in Nelson Mandela Bay

In South Africa, the quality of health care is directly related to the concept of patient-centred care and the enactment of the Batho Pele Principles and the Patients' Rights Charter. Reports in the media indicate that public hospitals in the Eastern Cape Province are on the brink of collapse, with many patients being treated in condemned hospitals which lacked piped water, electricity and essential medical equipment. Receiving quality care, and principally patient-centred care, in the face of such challenges is unlikely and consequently leads to the following question: “Are patients receiving patient-centred care in public hospitals?”A qualitative, explorative, descriptive and contextual study was conducted to explore and describe the perceptions of professional nurses regarding patient-centred care in public hospitals in Nelson Mandela Bay. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a total of 40 purposively selected professional nurses working in public hospitals in Nelson Mandela Bay, Eastern Cape Province. Interviews were analysed according to the method described by Tesch in Creswell (2009:192).Professional nurses perceive patient-centred care as an awareness of the importance of the patient's culture, involving the patient's family, incorporating values of love and respect, optimal communication in all facets of patient care and accountability to the patient. Factors which enable patient-centred care were a positive work environment for staff, nursing manager's demonstrating exemplary professional leadership, continuous in service education for staff and collaborative teamwork within the interdisciplinary team. Barriers to patient-centred care were a lack of adequate resources, increased administrative work due to fear of litigation and unprofessional behaviour of nursing staff.

The Effects of Twombly and Iqbal

Ever since Twombly and Iqbal introduced the doctrine of plausibility pleading, a cottage industry of legal scholars (including myself) has undertaken to detect the effects of Twombly and Iqbal on litigants and case outcomes. Results so far have been equivocal, and it has been hard to make sense of the disparate methodologies and findings. In this paper, I develop a comprehensive framework for empirically testing the effect of Twombly and Iqbal on lower courts and litigants, taking into account a wide range of confounding factors and the numerous ways in which Twombly and Iqbal may have indirectly affected litigant behavior. Using this framework, I test for effects of Twombly and Iqbal on district court and litigant behavior using two datasets — one of administrative data, one of docket and complaint data — each of which, when this project is complete, will be the largest database of its kind ever compiled. I also review existing findings. Based on preliminary analyses, which are subject to revision as additional data is gathered, I find virtually no evidence that Twombly and Iqbal, the two most important pleading cases in 50 years, have had a major effect on the behavior of lawyers and judges across all cases. Rates of dismissal with prejudice have held steady, motions to dismiss remain uncommon, and settlement and filing patterns have not changed appreciably in the wake of Twombly and Iqbal. There is, however, some evidence of changes in the drafting of pleadings and a greater effect on pro se plaintiffs.

Bending the Law

Legal reasoning requires identification, through search, of authoritative legal texts (such as statutes, constitutions, or prior judicial decisions) that apply to a given legal question. In this paper we model the concept of the law search as an organizing principle in the evolution of the corpus of legal texts, apply that model to U.S. Supreme Court opinions. We examine the underlying navigable geometric and topological structure of the Supreme Court opinion corpus (the "opinion landscape") and quantify and study its dynamic evolution. We realize the legal document corpus as a geometric network in which nodes are legal texts connected in a weighted and interleaved fashion according to both semantic similarity and citation connection. This network representation derives from a stylized generative process that models human-executed search via a probabilistic agent that navigates between cases according to these legally relevant features. The network model and (parametrized) probabilistic search behavior give rise to a PageRank-style ranking of the texts -- already implemented in a pilot version on a publicly accessible website -- that can be compared to search results produced by human researchers. The search model also gives rise to a natural geometry through which we can measure change in the network. This enables us to then measure the ways in which new judicial decisions affect the topography of the network and its future evolution. While we deploy it here on the U.S. Supreme Court opinion corpus, there are obvious extensions to larger bodies of evolving bodies of legal text (or text corpora in general). The model is a proxy for the way in which new opinions influence the search behavior of litigants and judges and thus affect the law. This type of legal search effect is a new legal consequence of research practice that has not been previously identified in jurisprudential thought and has never before been subject to empirical analysis. We quantitatively estimate the extent of this effect and find significant relationships between search-related network structures and propensity of future citation. This finding indicates that influence on search is a pathway through which judicial decisions can affect future legal development.