Institutional Competition, Political Process and Holdup.

We compare the effect of legal and institutional competition for the design of labor institutions in an environment characterized by holdup problems in human and in physical capital. We compare autarky with the two country case assuming that capital is perfectly mobile and labor immobile. We distinguish two cases. In the first one, the political system is free from capture, while in the second, we examine the case where labor captured the institutional design problem. We find that in the former case, a competition of systems reduces welfare while in the latter case it improves the overall outcome.

Real Options Theory for Law Makers

The formulation of legal rules is a challenging issue for lawmakers. Trade-offs are inevitable between providing more guidance by specific rules and enlarging the scope by general rules. Using real options theory we show that the degree of precision should be considered as a degree of flexibility which increases the value of the text. Thus, we derive a normative principle for a draftsman to choose between rules versus standards and to decide when the law should be enacted. In highly innovating environments, delaying the enactment allows lawmakers to obtain more information. Therefore, the lower the degree of precision of the law, the shorter the delay.degree of precision ; flexibility ; obsolescence ; rulemaking

Real Options Theory for Law Maker.

In rapidly changing areas of law, the writing of rules is a challenging issue for lawmakers. Obsolescence impede law to capture the objective of an underlying policy. The legislator, the judge and the regulator are considered as producers of law who have to decide whether or not to invest in a particular type of law. In order to get more information on the context, lawmakers may also choose to wait before investing in law. Using the real options framework, we show that the degree of precision should be considered as a degree of flexibility of legal rules and we describe how it affects the value of the investment. We then analyze the trade-off between waiting and reducing the degree of precision and we show that the degree of precision of legal rules positively affects the value of waiting in lawmaking.Obsolescence, Rulemaking, Degree of Precision, Real Options.

Informational Externalities and Settlements in Mass Tort Litigations

This paper elaborates on a basic model of mass tort litigation, highlighting the existence of positive informational externalities a¤orded by the discovery process (as a general technology of production of evidences) in order to study when a class action is formed, or when a sequence of individual trials is more likely. We illustrate the argument that when several plaintiffs file individually a lawsuit against the same tortfeasor, the resolution of the various cases through repeated trials produces positive informational externalities. When class actions are forbidden, these externalities only benefit to the later plaintiffs (through precedents, jurisprudence...). When they are allowed, the first filer may have an incentive to initiate a class action as far as it enables him to benefit from these externalities, through the sharing of information with later filers. We provide sufficient conditions under which a class action is formed, assuming a perfect discovery process. We also show that when contingent fees are used to reward attorneys' services, plaintiffs become neutral to the arrival of new information on their case.Mass Tort Class Action, information sharing, repeated litigation, contingent fees

Customary versus Technological. Advancement Tests.

In an environment where the optimal level of care is unknown, we ask under a state of the art defense which method is better able to induce parties to undertake optimal care. Assuming courts can see a noisy signal of research activities undertaken by a defendant and some of its competitors, we ask whether courts should use a biased or unbiased average to compare care. We find that the later is better.Tort law, standard of care, customary test, technological advancement test.

Informational Externalities and Settlements in Mass Tort Litigations

This paper elaborates on a basic model of mass tort litigation, highlighting the existence of positive informational externalities afforded by the discovery process (as a general technology of production of evidences) in order to study when a class action is formed, or when a sequence of individual trials is more likely. We illustrate the argument that when several plaintiffs file individually a lawsuit against the same tortfeasor, the resolution of the various cases through repeated trials produces positive informational externalities. When class actions are forbidden, these externalities only benefit to the later plaintiffs (through precedents, jurisprudence...). When they are allowed, the first filers may have an incentive to initiate a class action as far as it enables him to benefit from these externalities, through the sharing of information with later filers. We provide sufficient conditions under which a class action is formed, assuming a perfect discovery process. We also show that when contingent fees are used to reward attorneys' services, plaintiffs become neutral to the arrival of new information on their case.Mass Tort Class Action, information sharing, repeated litigation, contingent fees.

Informational externalities and informational sharing in class action suits

When several plaintiffs file individually a lawsuit against the same tortfeasor, the resolution of the various cases through repeated trials produces positive informational externalities, which benefit to the later plaintiffs (since there exist precedents, jurisprudence...). Thus, the first filers may have an incentive to initiate a class action as far as it enables the various plaintiffs to share their information. This feature has not been stressed in the literature, and in contrast strategic uses of class actions have been studied in more details (Che (1996), Marceau and Mongrain (2003)). In this paper, we elaborate on a basic strategic model of litigation settlement, focusing on the interactions between the characteristics of the discovery process (as a general technology of production of evidences) in mass tort litigation, those of the compensation rules set by Courts, and the structure of litigation costs, in order to study when a class action fails to occur, and when sequential trials are more likely. We consider the case of a perfect discovery process. We provide sufficient conditions under which a class action is formed. We show that when victims have heterogeneous claims, the compensatory damages rule awarded by Courts is of major importance for the formation of the class action, whatever the degree of heterogeneity: all else equal, there always exists a degree of \textit{damage averaging} under which the class action occurs. We also show that when contingent fees are used to reward attorneys' services, plaintiffs become neutral to the arrival of new information on their case.Mass Tort Class Action; information sharing; repeated litigation; contingent fees