Central economic planning traditionally has set goals and allocated resources by supplanting the price system with central direction. Planners engaged in industry-by-industry and firn-by-firm decision making, all to achieve predetermined targets. The neoclassical approach to law and economics posits that common lawjudges engage in a similaractivity, in rendering decisions that maximize wealth. A significant feature of this approach is the dacement of iudges in the msition of calculators of com~arative values. Neither --advocates of central planning nor those of judicial wealth maximizing address or solve the economic calculation ~roblem. The various aspects of that problem hold two imdicationsfor common lawjudges. First, they cannot accomplish the tasks that theneoclassical approach sets oul for them. Second, a recognition of the calculation problem leads to a rejection of balancing and the choice of rights-based, bright-line rules that return actual and potential litigants' decisions to the market.