Regression Estimates of Damages in Price-Fixing Cases (From Statistics and the Law, P 79-106, 1986, Morris H. DeGroot, et al, eds. -- See NCJ-117664)

• NCJ Number: 117665
• Author(s): M O Finkelstein; H Levenbach
• Date Published: 1986
• Length: 28 pages
• Sale Source: John Wiley and Sons
• Publication Type: Program/Project Evaluation
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

Four cases are described in which multiple regression was used to estimate damages in antitrust price-fixing cases.

Abstract

The question of whether multiple regression can be used appropriately to estimate damages in antitrust price-fixing cases has been explored by several authors, damages being measured by the difference between prices paid by plaintiff purchasers and prices they would have paid in the absence of defendant conspiracy. The four cases suggest that the excursion of courts into econometrics and statistics is characterized by two perhaps conflicting observations. The first is the fact that the judicial system presides over the payment of damages when regression evidence of injury is equivocal at best. The second is that the introduction of regression methods may tilt a case against plaintiffs when there is a trial. While theoretical economics suggests a positive response to the question of whether multiple regression can be used appropriately to estimate damages in antitrust price-fixing cases, an examination of the four cases in which expert witnesses attempted to use the technique in actual litigation indicates that considerable caution is required. 17 references, 4 figures. (Author abstract modified)