When might claims of “too much litigation” be other than political sloganeering?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1147Palabras clave:
litigios en EE. UU., litigiosidad en EE. UU., dotación autoritaria de valores, anecdotalismoResumen
Este artículo responde a la pregunta de "¿Demasiados litigios?" de tres formas. Primero: cuando los políticos presumen o afirman que la cultura de EE. UU. sufre de demasiados litigios, a menudo intercambian temas de debate político, distorsiones convenientes, enumeraciones falsas y anecdotalismo oportunista que tienden a preservar o aumentar las ventajas de quienes tienen más sobre las de quienes tienen menos. En segundo lugar, cuando los expertos preguntan qué tipos de litigios sirven bien o mal a que propósitos, los temas de “demasiados litigios” o “demasiada litigiosidad” pueden sobreponerse a los eslóganes políticos hasta el punto de que los académicos toman en cuenta el efecto que tienen los litigios en las ventajas o desventajas de quienes tienen más y de quienes tienen menos. En tercer lugar, cuando los académicos reconceptualizan el litigio como una dotación autoritaria de valores más allá del hecho de ganar casos, obtener beneficios y reconocimientos, y mover la ley o la política gradualmente, nociones como “litigioso” o “litigiosidad” pueden llegar a ser más, y mejores, que unos eslóganes políticos.
Descargas
Metrics
Downloads:
PDF (English) 229
XML (English) 213
Citas
Abel, R.L., 1987. The Real Tort Crisis – Too Few Claims. Ohio State Law Journal, 48, 443–67.
Achen, C.H., and Bartels, L.M., 2017. Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government [online]. Princeton University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400888740 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Bailis, D.S., and MacCoun, R.J., 1996. Estimating Liability Risks with the Media as Your Guide: A Content Analysis of Media Coverage of Tort Litigation. Law and Human Behavior [online], 20, 419–429. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01498978 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Baker, T., 2007. The Medical Malpractice Myth. University of Chicago Press.
Barnes, J., 2011. Dust-Up: Asbestos Litigation and the Failure of Commonsense Policy Reform. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Barnes, J., and Burke, T.F., 2015. How Policy Shapes Politics: Rights, Courts, Litigation, and the Struggle Over Injury Compensation [online]. New York: Oxford University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199756117.001.0001 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Bickel, A.M., 1962. The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
Bogus, C.T., 2003. Why Lawsuits are Good for America: Disciplined Democracy, Big Business, and the Common Law. New York: NYU Press.
Boot, M., 1998. Out of Order: Arrogance, Corruption, and Incompetence on the Bench. New York: Basic Books.
Bruun, R., 1982. The Boldt Decision: Legal Victory, Political Defeat. Law and Policy [online], 4(3), 271–298. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9930.1982.tb00277.x [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Bumiller, K., 1988. The Civil Rights Society: The Social Construction of Victims. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Burke, T.F., and Barnes, J., 2017. Varieties of Legal Order: The Politics of Adversarial and Bureaucratic Legalism [online]. New York: Routledge. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203095072 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Center for Justice and Democracy, 2012. We the Plaintiffs – A Retort [online]. New York: CJ&D, 19 July. Available from: https://centerjd.org/content/we-plaintiffs-retort [Accessed 10 May 2019].
Chander, A., 2005. Globalism and Distrust. Yale Law Journal [online], 114(6), 1193–1236. Available from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/i388623 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Chesebro, K.J., 1993. Galileo’s Retort: Peter Huber’s Junk Scholarship. American University Law Review, 42, 1637–1726.
Chin, A., and Peterson, M.A., 1985. Deep Pockets, Empty Pockets: Who Wins in Cook County Jury Trials? Santa Monica: The Institute for Civil Justice, Rand Corporation.
Connolly, W.E., 1993. Terms of Political Discourse. 3rd ed. Princeton University Press.
Cox, G.D., 1992. Tort Tales Lash Back. National Law Journal, 3 August, 1 & 36.
Crenson, M.A., 1972. The Un-Politics of Air Pollution: A Study of Non-Decisionmaking in the Cities. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Cross, F.B., 2011. Tort Law and the American Economy. Minnesota Law Review, 96, 28–89.
Daniels, S., and Martin, J., 1986. Jury Verdicts and the “Crisis” in Civil Justice. Justice System Journal, 11, 321–48.
Daniels, S., and Martin, J., 1995. Civil Juries and the Politics of Reform. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Daniels, S., and Martin, J., 2002. It Was the Best of Times, It Was the Worst of Times: The Precarious Nature of Plaintiffs’ Practice in Texas. Texas Law Review, 80(7), 1781–1821.
Dave, A., and Bhardwaj, M., 2019. Pepsi is suing four Indian farmers 10 million rupees each for growing the potato used to make Lay’s. The Financial Post [online], 29 April. Available from: https://business.financialpost.com/commodities/agriculture/update-1-pepsico-sues-four-indian-farmers-for-using-its-patented-lays-potatoes [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Deal, C., and Doroshow, J., 2000. The CALA Files: The Secret Campaign by Big Tobacco and Other Major Industries to Take Away Your Rights [online]. New York: Center for Justice and Democracy, 3 August. Available from: https://centerjd.org/content/cala-files-secret-campaign-big-tobacco-and-other-major-industries-take-away-your-rights [Accessed 10 May 2019].
Derthick, M.A., 2011. Up in Smoke: From Legislation to Litigation in Tobacco Politics [online]. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483387673 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Easton, D., 1953. The Political System: An Inquiry into the State of Political Science. New York: Alfred Knopf.
Edelman, M., 1971. Politics as Symbolic Action: Mass Arousal and Quiescence [online]. Madison: Institute for Research on Poverty. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-230650-1.50005-9 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Edelman, M., 1988. Constructing the Political Spectacle. University of Chicago Press.
Engel, D.M., 2016. The Myth of the Litigious Society: Why We Don’t Sue [online]. The University of Chicago Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226305189.001.0001 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Farhang, S., 2010. The Litigation State: Public Regulation and Private Lawsuits in the U. S [online]. Princeton University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400836789 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Felstiner, W.L.F., Abel, R., and Sarat, A., 1980–81. The Emergence and Transformation of Disputes: Naming, Blaming, and Claiming… Law and Society Review, 15, 631–54.
Galanter, M., 1983a. Mega-Law and Mega-Lawyering in the Contemporary United States. In: R. Dingwall and F. Lewis, eds., The Sociology of The Professions: Lawyers, Doctors and Others. New Orleans: Quid Pro, 152–176.
Galanter, M., 1983b. Reading the Landscape of Disputes: What We Know and Don’t Know (And Think We Know) about Our Allegedly Contentious and Litigious Society. UCLA Law Review, 31(1), 4–71.
Galanter, M., 1986. The Day After the Litigation Explosion. Maryland Law Review, 46, 3–39.
Galanter, M., 1992. Pick a Number, Any Number. Legal Times, 17 February, 82, 84.
Galanter, M., 1993a. News from Nowhere: The Debased Debate on Civil Justice. Denver University Law Review, 1, 77–113.
Galanter, M., 1993b. The Tort Panic and After: A Commentary. Justice System Journal [online], 16(2), 1–5. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/23277556.1993.10871168 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Galanter, M., 2006. Lowering the Bar: Lawyer Jokes and Legal Culture. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Galanter, M., 2014. Why the Haves Come Out Ahead: The Classic Essay and New Observations. New Orleans: Quid Pro.
Galanter, M., and Cahill, M., 1994. “Most Cases Settle”: Judicial Promotion and Regulation of Settlements. Stanford Law Review [online], 46(6), 1339–1391. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2307/1229161 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Garry, P.M., 1997. A Nation of Adversaries: How the Litigation Explosion is Reshaping America [online]. New York: Plenum Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-6604-9 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Gaventa, J., 1980. Power and Powerlessness: Quiescence and Rebellion in an Appalachian Valley. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.
Gilens, M., 2014. Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America. Princeton University Press.
Glaberson, W.B., and Farrell, C., 1986. The Explosion in Liability Lawsuits Is Nothing But a Myth. Business Week, 21 April, 24.
Glendon, M.A., 1989. Abortion and Divorce in Western Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Glendon, M.A., 1991. Rights Talk: The Impoverishment of Political Discourse. New York: Free Press.
Haltom, W., 1998. Reporting on the Courts: How Mass Media Report Judicial Actions. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Haltom, W., and McCann, M., 1998. Law and Lore: Media, Common Knowledge, and The Politics of Civil Justice. Paper presented to the American Political Science Association in Boston, Massachusetts, U. S. A.
Haltom, W., and McCann, M., 2004. Distorting the Law: Politics, the Media, and the Litigation Crisis [online]. University of Chicago Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226314693.001.0001 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Hamilton, A., 1788. The Federalist [online], Number 78 “The Judiciary Department”, 14 June. Available from: http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa78.htm [Accessed 22 May 2019].
Hans, V.P., 1989. The Jury’s Response to Business and Corporate Wrongdoing. Law and Contemporary Problems [online], 52(4), 177–203. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2307/1191910 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Hans, V.P., 2000. Business on Trial: The Civil Jury and Corporate Responsibility. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Hans, V.P., and Vidmar, N., 1986. Judging the Jury [online]. New York: Plenum Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-6463-2 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Hatcher, L., 2005. Economic Libertarians, Property, and Institutions: Linking Activism, Ideas, and Identities among Property Rights Advocates. In: A. Sarat and S. Scheingold, eds., The Worlds Cause Lawyers Make: Structure and Agency in Legal Practice. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.
Hensler, D.R., 1986. Summary of Research Results on Product Liability. Santa Monica: The Institute for Civil Justice, Rand Corporation.
Hensler, D.R., 1994. Why We Don’t Know More About the Civil Justice System – And What We Could Do About It. USC Law (Fall), 10–15.
Hollis-Brusky, A., 2015. Ideas with Consequences: The Federalist Society and the Conservative Counterrevolution. Oxford University Press.
Horowitz, D.L., 1977. The Courts and Social Policy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Huber, P.W., 1988. Liability: The Legal Revolution and Its Consequences. New York: Basic Books.
Kagan, R.A., 2001. Adversarial Legalism: The American Way of Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kluger, R., 1996. Ashes to Ashes: America’s Hundred-Year Cigarette War, the Public Health, and the Unabashed Triumph of Philip Morris. New York: Alfred Knopf.
Koenig, T., and Rustad, M., 2002. In Defense of Tort Law. New York: NYU Press.
Kritzer, H.M., 2002. Lawyer Fees and Lawyer Behavior in Litigation: What Does the Empirical Literature Really Say? Texas Law Review, 80(7), 1943–1983.
Kritzer, H.M., 2004. Advocacy and Rhetoric vs. Scholarship and Evidence in the Debate over Contingency Fees: A Reply to Professor Brickman. Washington University Law Quarterly, 82, 477, 496–97.
Kritzer, H.M., and Silbey, S., 2003. In Litigation: Do the “Haves” Still Come Out Ahead? Redwood City: Stanford University Press.
Lahav, A.D., 2006. The Roles of Litigation in American Democracy. Emory Law Journal, 65, 1657–1704.
Malott, R.H., 1985. America’s Liability Explosion: Can We Afford the Cost? Vital Speeches of the Day. 1 January 1986, 180–183.
Manning, B., 1977. Hyperlexis: Our National Disease. Northwestern University Law Review, 71(6), 767–782.
Mather, L., 1998. Theorizing about Trial Courts: Lawyers, Policymaking and Tobacco Litigation. Law & Social Inquiry [online], 23(4), 897–940. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.1998.tb00037.x [Accessed 6 April 2020].
McCann, M., 1994. Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization. University of Chicago Press.
McCann, M., 2008. Litigation and Legal Mobilization. In: K.E. Whittington, R.D. Keleman and G.A. Caldeira, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics [online]. Oxford University Press, Chapter 30, 522-540. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199208425.003.0030 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
McCann, M., (with G.I. Lovell), 2020. Union by Law: Filipino American Labor Activists, Rights Radicalism, and Racial Capitalism [online]. University of Chicago Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226680071.001.0001 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
McCann, M., Haltom, W., and Fisher, S., 2013. Criminalizing Big Tobacco: Legal Mobilization and the Politics of Responsibility for Health Risks in the United States. Law & Social Inquiry [online], 38(2), 288–321. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.2011.01270.x [Accessed 6 April 2020].
McIntosh, W.V., and Cates, C.L., 1997. Judicial Entrepreneurship: The Role of the Judge in the Marketplace. Westport: Greenwood.
McIntosh, W.V., and Cates, C.L., 2009. Multi-Party Litigation: The Strategic Context. Vancouver: UBC Press.
McQuillan, L.J., 2009. An Empire Disaster: Why New York’s Tort System Is Broken and How to Fix It. San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute.
McQuillan, L.J., and Abramyan, H., 2007. Jackpot Justice: The True Cost of America's Tort System. San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute.
Mencimer, S., 2006. Blocking the Courthouse Door: How the Republican Party and Its Corporate Allies Are Taking Away Your Right to Sue. New York: Free Press.
Merry, S.E., 1990. Getting Justice and Getting Even: Legal Consciousness among Working-Class Americans. University of Chicago Press.
Miller, M.C., and Barnes, J., 2004. Making Policy, Making Law: An Interbranch Perspective. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Mnookin, R.H., and Kornhauser, L., 1979. Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: The Case of Divorce. Yale Law Journal [online], 88(5), 951–997. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2307/795824 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Nader, R., and Smith, W.J., 1996. No Contest: Corporate Lawyers and the Perversion of Justice in America. New York: Random House.
Olson, W.K., 1991. The Litigation Explosion: What Happened When America Unleashed the Lawsuit. New York: Truman Talley Books.
Page, B.I., and Gilens, M., 2017. Democracy in America? What Has Gone Wrong and What Can We Do About It? [online]. University of Chicago Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226509013.001.0001 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Peterson, M.A., 1984. Compensation for Injuries: Civil Jury Verdicts in Cook County. Santa Monica: The Institute for Civil Justice, Rand Corporation.
Public Health Law Center, no date. Master Settlement Agreement [online]. St Paul: Mitchell Hamline School of Law. Available from: https://publichealthlawcenter.org/topics/commercial-tobacco-control/commercial-tobacco-control-litigation/master-settlement-agreement [Accessed 11 May 2019].
Rosenberg, G.N., 2008. The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring about Social Change? University of Chicago Press.
Saks, M.J., 1992. Do We Really Know Anything about the Behavior of the Tort Litigation System – And Why Not? University of Pennsylvania Law Review [online], 140(4), 1147–1292. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2307/3312403 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Saks, M.J., 1993. Malpractice Misconceptions and Other Lessons about the Litigation System. Justice System Journal [online], 16(2), 7–19. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/23277556.1993.10871169 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Schattschneider, E.E., 1975. The Semisovereign People: A Realist’s View of Democracy in America. Revised ed. Boston: Cengage Learning.
Scheingold, S.A., 1974. The Politics of Rights: Lawyers, Public Policy, and Political Change. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Schlozman, K.L., Verba, S., and Brady, H.E., 2013. The Unheavenly Chorus: Political Voice and the Broken Promise of American Democracy [online]. Princeton University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691154848.001.0001 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Silverstein, G., 2009. Law’s Allure: How Law Shapes, Constrains, Saves, and Kills Politics [online]. Cambridge University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511809934 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Silverstein, S., 2019. With Smack-Talking Invective, Lawyer Groups Appeal to Public as One Big Jury Pool. Fairwarning [online], 24 January. Available from: https://www.fairwarning.org/2019/01/lawyer-trash-talk-judicial-hellholes/ [Accessed 27 April 2019].
Strasser, F., 1987. Tort Tales: Old Stories Never Die. National Law Journal, 16 February, 39.
Teles, S.M., 2010. The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law. Princeton University Press.
Werth, B., 1998. Damages: One Family's Legal Struggles in the World of Medicine. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Zegart, D., 2000. Civil Warriors: The Legal Siege on the Tobacco Industry. New York: Bantam/Delta.
Zemans, F.K., 1982. Framework for Analysis of Legal Mobilization: A Decision-Making Model. American Bar Association Research Journal [online], 7(4), 989–1071. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.1982.tb00476.x [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Zemans, F.K., 1983. Legal Mobilization: The Neglected Role of the Law in the Political System. American Political Science Review [online], 77(3), 690–703. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2307/1957268 [Accessed 6 April 2020].
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2021 William T. Haltom, Michael W. McCann
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.
Los autores conservan el copyright de sus trabajos, que se publicarán en OSLS bajo una licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento NoComercial SinObraDerivada. Puede consultar más detalles en: http://es.creativecommons.org/licencia/. Si no está de acuerdo con esta licencia, por favor, póngase en contacto con nosotros.
El autor concede los permisos necesarios para difundir la información bibliográfica del artículo, incluyendo el resumen, y autorizar a otros, incluyendo las bases de datos bibliográficas, de índices y servicios de alerta de contenidos, a copiar y comunicar esta información.
Para más información sobre los permisos para distribuir su artículo en cada fase de la producción, por favor, lea nuestra Política de Autoarchivo y Divulgación (en inglés).
Las condiciones de copyright con el nombre de autores y co-autores, y la licencia Creative Commons se mostrarán en el artículo. Estas condiciones se deben aceptar como parte del proceso de envío de un artículo a la revista. Por favor, asegúrese de que todos los co-autores se mencionan correctamente, y que entienden y aceptan estos términos.
