Near‐sighted Justice
- 1 December 2004
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in The Journal of Finance
- Vol. 59 (6) , 2655-2684
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2004.00712.x
Abstract
Chapter 11 structures complex negotiations between creditors and debtors that are overseen by a bankruptcy court. We identify conditions where the court should sometimes err in determining which firms should be liquidated. Such errors affect actions by both good and bad entrepreneurs. We first characterize the optimal error rate without renegotiation. When creditors and debtors can renegotiate to circumvent an error‐riven court, for one class of actions a blind court that ignores all information is optimal. For another class, the court should place the burden of proof on the entrepreneur. The robust feature is that the court should sometimes err.Keywords
This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- The quality of governmentJournal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 1999
- Law and FinanceJournal of Political Economy, 1998
- The Design of Bankruptcy Law: A Case for Management Bias in Bankruptcy ReorganizationsJournal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 1998
- Adversarial and Inquisitorial Procedures in ArbitrationThe RAND Journal of Economics, 1998
- Burdens of Proof in Civil Litigation: An Economic PerspectiveThe Journal of Legal Studies, 1997
- The Burden of Proof in a Game of PersuasionJournal of Economic Theory, 1994
- Troubled debt restructuringsJournal of Financial Economics, 1990
- The Optimal Amount of Discretion to Allow in DisclosureThe Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1990
- Relying on the Information of Interested PartiesThe RAND Journal of Economics, 1986
- Good News and Bad News: Representation Theorems and ApplicationsThe Bell Journal of Economics, 1981