one of the characteristics of pecuniary claims at the time of submitting the lawsuit is obligation of the plaintiff to mention the value of relief sought. the amount of relief sought plays a key role in the lawsuit which determines the competent court, the possibility of appeals. basically, the value of relief is determined by the plaintiff which may be protested by the defendant. this protest ...

A rich theoretical literature describes the disadvantages facing plaintiffs who suffer multiple, or intersecting, axes of discrimination. This article extends extant literature by distinguishing two forms of intersectionality: demographic intersectionality, in which overlapping demographic characteristics produce disadvantages that are more than the sum of their parts, and claim intersectionali...

The incentives of a plaintiff in a lawsuit are affected by a variety of legal rules. One leading example is the proportion of the fine imposed on the defendant that is awarded to the plaintiff. Another is the identity of the plaintiff himself: private litigants are motivated by the prospect of receiving damages, while government employed plaintiffs (such as public prosecutors and employees of r...

We provide a simple incomplete-information model wherein an initially uninformed plaintiff makes a menu of settlement demands (one of which involves confidentiality) of the informed defendant. The defendant is informed about both his culpability in the harm suffered by the current plaintiff and the existence of other plaintiffs. The possibility that there are other plaintiffs the defendant migh...

A solution to a broad category of nuisance suits is examined in this paper. The solution is to give defendants the option to have courts prevent settlements (by refusing to enforce them). Then, if a defendant knows he is facing a plaintiff who would not be willing to go to trial, the defendant would exercise his option to bar settlement, forcing the plaintiff to withdraw. And because the plaint...

Law360, New York (April 30, 2008) -There is fairly widespread agreement that proof of causation in a toxic tort case requires three steps: first, the plaintiff must prove that the alleged toxin can cause an injury of the sort he alleges (general causation); second, the plaintiff must prove that he was exposed to the toxin in amounts sufficient to have caused his injury; and third, the plaintiff...

We study the decision of when to sue in a game in which multiple plaintiffs have similar cases against a single defendant. Two legal regimes are considered. In one, prior results are binding in all future cases. In contrast, under the prevalent asymmetric regime, adverse results are binding against the defendant in future actions, but a judgement adverse to one plaintiff will not be binding aga...

I t is increasingly common for companies to be subject to lawsuits in multiple countries involving similar underlying facts, brought by different plaintiffs. For example, companies may be alleged to have engaged in malfeasance abroad, and subject to lawsuits in both the United States by a U.S.-based plaintiff and the country in which the alleged conduct occurred by a plaintiff in that country. ...