Abstract
The jury is at the center of controversy over the ability of courts to deal with complexities of contemporary civil litigation. Juries have been said to be incompetent, biased, sympathy-prone, confused by battles between experts and complex evidence, hostile to corporate defendants and doctors, gullible, excessively generous in awarding compensatory damages, and out of control when awarding punitive damages. Most of these claims have been made on the basis of anecdotes, unreliable statistics, and appeals to "common sense." However, over the past quarter century, a substantial body of empirical research on juries has assessed the claims and most of the time has found them to be not substantiated. This Article presents a comprehensive review of this research.
How to Cite
40 Ariz. L. Rev. 849 (1998)
19
Views
10
Downloads
