1993
DOI: 10.5085/0898-5510-6.2.93
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Misapplication of the Hedonic Damages Concept to Wrongful Death and Personal Injury Litigation

Abstract: No abstract available.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1994
1994
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In a recent article Havrilesky (1993) argues against applying the hedonic damages concept to wrongful death and injury cases. The purpose of this paper is to critique his arguments.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a recent article Havrilesky (1993) argues against applying the hedonic damages concept to wrongful death and injury cases. The purpose of this paper is to critique his arguments.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…See also the discussion in Section 4.1 below. 4 For the difference between valuing nonpecuniary losses for purposes of social benefit-cost analysis versus victim compensation in tort cases, seeHavrilesky (1993) andViscusi (2000).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…See also the discussion in Section 4.1 below. 4 For the difference between valuing nonpecuniary losses for purposes of social benefit-cost analysis versus victim compensation in tort cases, seeHavrilesky (1993) andViscusi (2000).terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/bca.2017.23 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%