1995•SSRN Electronic JournalOpen access

Can Fee Shifting Reduce the Incidence of Trial? Pretrial Bargaining in the Face of a Rule 68 Offer

Amy L. Farmer, Paul Pecorino

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

Under Rule 68, a defendant may submit a pretrial offer of judgment to the plaintiff. If the plaintiff refuses this offer and later receives a smaller award at trial, the defendant's court costs subsequent to the offer are shifted to the plaintiff. We analyze Rule 68 in a game theoretic setting where trials may result from an informational asymmetry in which the defendant is the informed party. We find that Rule 68 may help to encourage settlement through the offer of judgment which may partially reveal privately held information. However, the effectiveness of Rule 68 in encouraging settlement depends upon the amount of fees subject to shifting. Increasing the fees subject to shifting has an ambiguous effect on settlement, but taking the extent of fee shifting as given, settlement rates are always higher with Rule 68 than without it. The structure of the model and the key results are contrasted with Spier (1994).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Under Rule 68, a defendant may submit a pretrial offer of judgment to the plaintiff. If the plaintiff refuses this offer and later receives a smaller award at trial, the defendant's court costs subsequent to the offer are shifted to the plaintiff. We analyze Rule 68 in a game theoretic setting where trials may result from an informational asymmetry in which the defendant is the informed party. We find that Rule 68 may help to encourage settlement through the offer of judgment which may partially reveal privately held information. However, the effectiveness of Rule 68 in encouraging settlement depends upon the amount of fees subject to shifting. Increasing the fees subject to shifting has an ambiguous effect on settlement, but taking the extent of fee shifting as given, settlement rates are always higher with Rule 68 than without it. The structure of the model and the key results are contrasted with Spier (1994).

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Under Rule 68, a defendant may submit a pretrial offer of judgment to the plaintiff. If the plaintiff refuses this offer and later receives a smaller award at trial, the defendant's court costs subsequent to the offer are shifted to the plaintiff. We analyze Rule 68 in a game theoretic setting where trials may result from an informational asymmetry in which the defendant is the informed party. We find that Rule 68 may help to encourage settlement through the offer of judgment which may partially reveal privately held information. However, the effectiveness of Rule 68 in encouraging settlement depends upon the amount of fees subject to shifting. Increasing the fees subject to shifting has an ambiguous effect on settlement, but taking the extent of fee shifting as given, settlement rates are always higher with Rule 68 than without it. The structure of the model and the key results are contrasted with Spier (1994).

Key concepts: Plaintiff, Settlement (finance), American rule, Information asymmetry, Law and economics, Subject (documents), Law, Face (sociological concept)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Can Fee Shifting Reduce the Incidence of Trial? Pretrial Bargaining in the Face of a Rule 68 Offer — Research Paper | ScholarLens