Do Repeat Players Behave Differently in Russia? Contractual and Litigation Behavior of Russian Enterprises

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Wiley and Law and Society Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Law &Society Review.We examine whether Galanter's repeat player (RP) concept helps in deciphering the law-related behavior of Russian enterprises. We adapt the RP concept to the Russian context defining the Russian repeat player (RRP). Using data from 328 enterprises, we examine whether RRP-ness explains the use of protokols of disagreement, petitioning to freeze assets, contractual prepayment, and litigation activity. RRPs are very different from Galanter's RPs, generally exhibiting less aggression and innovativeness, but suing other RRPs frequently. Examination of factors other than RRP-ness suggests the presence of lawyers is important in determining law-related activity, a result not necessarily expected in Russia. Adapting the Repeat Player Concept to RussiaIn his seminal article, Galanter (1974) argued that repeat players (RPs) are particularly well equipped to use law and the legal system to their advantage. His analysis is based on the U.S. experience, both in terms of the nature of the parties and the institutional environment. This article examines whether Galanter's RP concept smoothly crosses borders, helping to decipher the law-related behavior of enterprises in the new Russian market economy. In doing so, the article offers contributions on two levels. First, it is a case study that examines whether theories and concepts developed in one political, institutional, and social Thanks are due to Alla V.In all these analyses, the results confound the predictions that would arise by transplanting Galanter's theories to Russia. Being an RRP does not give rise to the same sorts of behavioral patterns as Galanter found among RPs in the U.S. context. Stopping the analysis at this step, however, would obviously be discomfiting because it might leave the reader wondering what factors can explain law-related behavior in Russia and indeed whether our results on RPs reflect some extreme randomness in either the Russian environment or our data, so that no theories would work. Thus, the empirical analyses presented here go a step beyond the parameters of Galanter's original framework examining additional explanatory variables.For each of the three hypotheses-aggressiveness and innovativeness in interactions, playing for the rules, and intensity of litigation-we examine a series of additional explanatory variables. The choice of variables to examine is driven by common sense and the prevailing assumptions within the scholarly literature. For example, we investigate whether bigger and older enterprises enjoy a comparative advantage in legal matters; whether there is a regional...

Supreme Court Outcomes in Criminal Justice Cases (1994-2012 Terms)

“…The author of the article, law professor Marc Galanter (1974), set forth "some conjectures about the way in which the basic architecture of the legal system creates and limits the possibilities of using the system as a means of redistributive change" (p. 95). Since the publication of Galanter's article, scholars applied the framework and concepts to a number of sociopolitical phenomena (Hendley, Murrell, & Ryterman, 1999;Kinsey & Stalans, 1999), including the behavior of appellate courts (Atkins, 1991;Farole, 1999;Songer, Sheehan, & Brodie Haire, 1999). Since the publication of Galanter's article, scholars applied the framework and concepts to a number of sociopolitical phenomena (Hendley, Murrell, & Ryterman, 1999;Kinsey & Stalans, 1999), including the behavior of appellate courts (Atkins, 1991;Farole, 1999;Songer, Sheehan, & Brodie Haire, 1999).…”

How Russian Enteprises Cope With Payments Problems

“…40 As a rule, sellers prefer using their own form contracts when selling their output since they are typically skewed to their benefit. Hendley, Murrell, and Ryterman (1999a) document the preference of Russian sellers for their own form documents. Avto-Detaly is no exception.…”

“…Yet Russian lawyers persist in using the protocols, with more than three-fourths of the surveyed enterprises reporting some use. For a fuller analysis of their use, see Hendley, Murrell & Ryterman, 1999a. Downloaded by [Northeastern University] at 19:38 03 January 2015 using them. The creditors can wait for funds to come into these accounts, but their patience is rarely rewarded.…”

“…164-165). 8 Seventy-four percent of surveyed enterprises reported that their sales contracts include some form of prepayment (Hendley, Murrell, and Ryterman, 1999a). 9 As part of the survey, we asked procurement directors how many days elapsed between the time they ordered their bank to pay a typical supplier and that supplier's receipt of the payment.…”

The Two Motifs of “Why the ‘Haves’ Come Out Ahead” and Its Heirs

“…The contribution by Hendley et al (1999) on Russia qualifies the "haves" thesis in another relatively minor way: in the context of economic disruptions and the absence of stable business relationships, as in present-day Russia, the "haves" do not act like repeat players. In particular, large Russian businesses resolve many of their contractual disputes with similar businesses through litigation, in apparent inconsistency with Galanter's prediction that large organizations tied to similar organizations by long-term relationships should tend to administer their disputes outside of the regular court system.…”