Propensity to Sue in England and the United States of America

Blaming and Claiming in Tort Cases

Bibliographic Data

ID7525314
AuthorsHerbert M Kritzer (corresponding author)
Year1991
Volume18
Issue4
Pages400-400
Publication date1991-01-01
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Law and Society (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0263-323X • E-ISSN: 1467-6478
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.2307/1410316
OpenAlexW2321207525
LanguageEN
Citations received16
References cited2

The debate over the litigiousness of the American population has continued unabated in the last several years. On one side of the controversy are the observers, scholars, and policymakers who cite evidence of apparently ever increasing demands on the United States of America's civil justice system.' On the other side, writers cite historical,2 comparative,3 and other4 analyses indicating that use of the litigation alternative by Americans does not necessarily differ greatly either from past patterns (when the 'past' is extended back beyond the last fifty years) or from patterns of behaviour in other developed countries. In this article, I present a comparative analysis of one aspect of propensity to sue: compensation seeking in cases of injury. In the context of the debates over litigiousness, this is a key element. First, most of the litigiousness debate is focused on responses to physical injuries (for example, the tort liability insurance 'crisis'). Second, while the incidence of actual litigation is the result of a complex set of interactions, the decision to seek compensation is an individual level act; furthermore, few claims ever mature into litigation because most claimants and respondents arrive at an accommodation before formal court action is ever initiated. Because England is often cited as a contrast to the United States with regards to litigiousness, particularly in the tort context,5 England6 and the United States serve as my comparison cases. In the discussion that follows, I first summarize the conceptual framework guiding my analysis, briefly reviewing the empirical research on claiming behaviour in common law countries. I then compare the propensity of injury victims to claim through the tort system in the United States and England; I conclude that, while differences do exist, they may not be as large as is commonly supposed. I go on to argue that those differences cannot be explained entirely by legal and quasi-legal factors, but reflect fundamental cultural perspectives

Criminology · Liability · Political science · Sociology · Tort · Jury Decision Making Processes · Law · Law in Society and Culture · Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub