Article contents
In the Eye of the Beholder: Tort Litigants' Evaluations of their Experiences in the Civil Justice System
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 July 2024
Abstract
Little is known about the reactions of tort litigants to traditional and alternative litigation procedures. To explore this issue, we interviewed litigants in personal injury cases in three state courts whose cases had been resolved by trial, court-annexed arbitration, judicial settlement conferences, or bilateral settlement. The litigants viewed the trial and arbitration procedures as fairer than bilateral settlement, apparently because they believed that trials and arbitration hearings gave their case more respectful treatment. They were less satisfied with the outcome of judicial settlement conferences than with the outcome of bilateral settlements, because judicial settlement conference outcomes were more likely to fall below their expectations. In general, procedural justice judgments and outcome satisfaction were little related to objective outcome, cost, or delay; instead the evaluations appeared to be determined largely by perceptions of whether the procedure met litigants' criteria for procedural fairness and expectations on outcomes and costs. Gender, income, and race did not have much effect on evaluations.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 1990 The Law and Society Association.
Footnotes
The research reported here was supported in part by a grant from the National Science Foundation Law and Social Sciences Program. The authors are grateful to Craig McEwen and Carrie Menkel-Meadow for their comments on an earlier report of this research and to Gina Ke for her comments on this manuscript. The project on which this report is based was designed and conducted by Ebener, Felstiner, Hensler, and Resnik. Lind, MacCoun, and Tyler analyzed the data. Lind, MacCoun, and Hensler wrote the report, with assistance from the other authors.
References
References
Case Cited
- 96
- Cited by