An experimental investigation of procedural issues in complex tort trials.

Abstract

An investigation of the impact of innovations in civil trial procedure manipulated trial structure (unitary vs. separated trial issues), order of decisions (liability or causation first), and number of decisions made (one to four) in a simulated toxic tort trial. Juries gave verdicts and damage awards. Recordings were made of the juries' deliberations. The results showed significantly more verdicts in favor of the plaintiffs in unitary trials (causation, liability, and damages heard together) as opposed to separated trials. However, average damage awards were higher in the separated than in the unitary trial conditions. Juries assigned more responsibility to the defendant in the unitary trial. Juries also used the totality of the evidence to decide all issues, especially general causation, which contained the most ambiguous testimony. The performance of these simulated juries in complex litigation was discussed in terms of group and individual cognitive factors.

Double discounting: The effects of comparative negligence on mock juror decision making.

“…Further, the results of these studies are consistent with claims that jurors "fuse" the issues of liability and damages (Bornstein, 1998;Greene, 1989;Horowitz & Bordens, 1990;MacCoun, 1993). The question, then, is why do jurors fuse liability and damages?…”

“…Not only does this procedure allow for the direct manipulation of the specifi c amount of negligence attributed to the plaintiff, it also provides a framework for examining the effectiveness of bifurcated trials. In a bifurcated trial, the jury initially considers only liability; then, if liability has been established, a second phase occurs in which a jury (either the same or a different one) is presented with information relevant only to damages (Horowitz & Bordens, 1990). It is likely that determining both liability and damages would make the plaintiff's level of negligence more salient, thereby resulting in even greater discounting of the awards than when jurors award damages only.…”

Cigarette cravings impair mock jurors' recall of trial evidence

“…Participants were then presented with a transcript of evidence and judicial instructions that was developed by Horowitz and Bordens (1988) and has been used in a number of investigations examining the effects of trial complexity and note-taking on juror decisions (ForsterLee et al, 1994;ForsterLee et al, 1993;Horowitz & Bordens, 1990;Horowitz et al, 1996). The transcript is based on a real civil case (Wilhoite v. Olin Corp., 1985), whereby a toxic chemical was inappropriately dumped into an area of commerce, resulting in injuries sustained by a number of plaintiffs.…”

The effects of defendant account on damage award decisions

“…One study asked mock jurors to make damage award decisions in a case concerning harmful chemicals being released into an area (Horowitz & Bordens, 1990). The chemicals were released during a corporation's manufacturing process and several plaintiffs alleged physical ailments as a result of the chemicals.…”