Document Type

Article

Publication Title

Hofstra Law Review

Abstract

Some scholars of law and economics have advanced a bold theory that transforms the study of law from a complex, hydraheaded investigation of fact and value into a straight-forward application of two "simple" hypotheses: (i) the law should be efficient (the normative claim) and (ii) the law is in fact efficient (the descriptive claim). This Article argues that the simplicity of these two claims is deceptive. While the normative claim reduces to only two variants, the premises supporting them are controversial. The descriptive claim suffers from greater ambiguity: A wide variety of senses may be attributed to the term "efficiency" and the rule may be efficient relative to only one of a diverse set of alternative rules in possible contexts. I shall further argue that the descriptive claim of efficiency is arguably not a consequence of economic theory, and that both the normative and descriptive claims are problematic. These sections are followed by some brief suggestions of the uses of economics in law.

First Page

591

Volume

8

Publication Date

1980

Share

COinS