Abstract
Frequently, civil plaintiff trial attorneys want to test how different demands made in closing argument impact case outcomes. They worry that in admitted liability cases (where only damages are at issue) that asking for too much money could isolate jurors. And they worry that in cases in which liability is also at issue, asking for too much money could cause jurors to flip their votes on liability. Simultaneously, critics of juries worry about almost the precise opposite issue, arguing that jurors are excessively malleable and are therefore prone to anchoring and runaway juries. These concerns implicate anchoring, where most of the literature predicts that jurors will respond positively to ever increasing demands. And they implicate fusion effects which teach that liability and damages interact …
Campbell, John, Boomerangs, Cliffs, and Inverted U-Curves: Natural Delimitation of Damage Awards (June 29, 2018).
First posted 2018-07-05 05:09:10
Leave a Reply