Thank you for visiting us. We are currently updating our shopping cart and regret to advise that it will be unavailable until September 1, 2014. We apologise for any inconvenience and look forward to serving you again.
The login area provides access to embargoed journal content and journal
papers to registered members of the media. To request access to this content,
please complete the form available at
Please note you may be asked to provide evidence of media affiliation. If you
have any questions please email
October 05, 2009
U.S. Chamber of Commerce Releases Questionable Survey Results
In an article from a forthcoming issue of the Journal of Empirical Legal Studies the results of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Liability Survey for recent years are analyzed. The annual Chamber of Commerce surveys (dating back to 2002 and still in progress) are used to rank state judiciaries and are utilized in tort reform policy debates.
Author Theodore Eisenberg questions the legitimacy of the survey results, “The survey is not only inaccurate, unfair, and bad for business but the people interviewed knew very little about the states they were evaluating.” For example, Eisenberg asserts that for years the Chamber’s surveys claimed that New Jersey did not allow punitive damages when the state in fact has allowed them. In the Chamber surveys, a state that does not allow punitive damages can be outranked by states that do. Furthermore, the Chamber’s ranking of state judiciaries may bear little or no relation to actual legal developments in the states evaluated. New Jersey has plummeted in recent years in the Chamber’s ranking but Eisenberg’s detailed analysis of New Jersey cases suggests that the decline is not based on actual legal developments within the state.
Eisenberg suggests that the survey is simply an advocacy piece for tort reform and that instead of providing reliable information about the legal system, the Chamber has used the surveys as a lobbying tool to try to influence important policy issues. Eisenberg asserts that a further debate is needed as well as a more in-depth evaluation of the performance of state judiciaries.
This study is published in the October 2009 issue of the Journal of Empirical Legal Studies. Media wishing to receive a PDF of this article may contact email@example.com.
To view the abstract for this article, please click here.