Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tzmfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-24T12:32:27.877Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Framing the Choice Between Cash and the Courthouse: Experiences With the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Gillian K. Hadfield
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article I report the results of a quantitative and qualitative empirical study of how those who were injured or lost a family member in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks evaluated the tradeoff between a cash payment—available through the Victim Compensation Fund—and the pursuit of litigation. Responses make it clear that potential plaintiffs saw much more at stake than monetary compensation and that the choice to forego litigation required the sacrifice of important nonmonetary, civic values: obtaining and publicizing information about what happened, prompting public findings of accountability for those responsible, and participating in the process of ensuring that there would be responsive change to what was learned about how the attacks and deaths happened. The results shed light on the framing component of the transformation of disputes, and in particular on how potential litigants see the decision to sue, or not, as a decision as much or more about how they understand their relationship to their community and their responsibilities as a citizen as how they evaluate monetary considerations.

Type
A Symposium: Sociolegal Research Post 9/11
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 42 , Issue 3 , September 2008 , pp. 645 - 682
Copyright
© 2008 Law and Society Association.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

This work would not have been possible without the extraordinary contributions of the many 9/11 victims, family members, and lawyers who were willing to speak with me either directly or through the survey instrument and e-mails. I am grateful to them for sharing their experiences with me. I am especially grateful to those people who in addition to sharing their own stories were willing to help me connect with potential participants for this study without intruding on individuals' privacy. Ron Robinson played an important role in spurring this research in connection with the work of the Defense Research Institute on the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act. In the academic world I have benefited from comments and advice from many colleagues, notably Dan Ryan, Erica Goode, Bob Kagan, Dan Klerman, Lewis Kornhauser, Bob Mnookin, Bob Rabin, Judith Resnik, Steve Sugarman, Carroll Seron, and three anonymous referees and participants at workshops at USC, the New York Law and Society Colloquium, Stanford, Harvard, the Law and Society Association, the Conference on Empirical Legal Studies, UC Berkeley, and the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, where I was a fellow in 2006–2007. Financial and institutional support were generously provided by the Center for Advanced Study, the Mellon Foundation, and USC Law School. Esther Choi provided superb research assistance.

References

References

Ackerman, Robert M. (2005) “The September 11th Victim Compensation Fund: An Effective Administrative Response to National Tragedy,” 10 Harvard Negotiation Law Rev. 135–229.Google Scholar
Alexander, Janet Cooper (2003) “Procedural Design and Terror Victim Compensation,” 53 DePaul Law Rev. 627–718.Google Scholar
Barber, Benjamin (1984) Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, M. P. (1985) “Law and the Middle Class: Evidence from a Suburban Town,” 9 Law and Human Behavior 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, Elizabeth Heger (1998) “Political Frames and Legal Activity: The Case of Nuclear Power in Four Countries,” 32 Law & Society Rev. 141–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, Elizabeth Heger (2000) “Is Law the Rule? Using Political Frames to Explain Cross-National Variation in Legal Activity,” 79 Social Forces 385–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, Thomas F. (2002) Lawyers, Lawsuits, and Legal Rights: The Battle Over Litigation in American Society. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.Google Scholar
Chamallas, Martha (2003) “The September 11th Victim Compensation Fund: Rethinking the Damages Element in Injury Law,” 71 Tennessee Law Rev. 51–79.Google Scholar
Cooter, Robert D., & Rubinfeld, Daniel L (1989) “Economic Analysis of Legal Disputes and Their Resolution,” 27 J. of Economic Literature 1067–97.Google Scholar
Coulter, Ann (2006) Godless: The Church of Liberalism. New York: Crown Forum.Google Scholar
Curran, Barbara A. (1977) The Legal Needs of the Public: The Final Report of a National Survey. Chicago: American Bar Foundation.Google Scholar
Culhane, John G. (2003) “Tort, Compensation and Two Kinds of Justice,” 55 Rutgers Law Rev. 1027–107.Google Scholar
Dixon, Lloyd, & Stern, Rachel Kaganoff (2004) Compensation for Losses from the 9/11 Attacks. Los Angeles: RAND Institute for Civil Justice.Google Scholar
Ewick, Patricia, & Silbey, Susan S. (1998) The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feinberg, Kenneth R. (2004) Final Report of the Special Master for the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 (Vol. 1). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Feinberg, Kenneth R. (2005) What Is Life Worth? The Unprecedented Effort to Compensate the Victims of 9/11. New York: Public Affairs.Google Scholar
Felstiner, William L. F., et al. (1980–1981) “The Emergence and Transformation of Disputes: Naming, Blaiming, Claiming …,” 15 Law & Society Rev. 631–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiss, Owen (1984) “Against Settlement,” 93 Yale Law J. 1073–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galanter, Marc (2002) “The Turn Against Law: The Recoil Against Expanding Accountability,” 81 Texas Law Rev. 285–304.Google Scholar
Genn, Hazel (1995) “Access to Just Settlements: The Case of Medical Negligence,” in Zuckerman, A., & Cranston, R., Reform of Civil Procedure: Essays on “Access to Justice.” Oxford, United Kingdom: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Genn, Hazel (1999) Paths to Justice: What People Do and Think About Going to Law. Oxford, United Kingdom: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Henriques, Diana B., & Barstow, David (2001) “Victims' Fund Likely to Pay Average of $1.6 Million,” New York Times, 21 Dec.Google Scholar
Hensler, Deborah R. (2003) “Money Talks: Searching for Justice through Compensation for Personal Injury and Death,” 53 DePaul Law Rev. 417–56.Google Scholar
Heydebrand, Wolf V., & Seron, Carroll (1990) Rationalizing Justice: The Political Economy of Federal District Courts. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press.Google Scholar
Landsman, Stephan (2003) “A Chance to Be Heard: Thoughts about Schedules, Caps, and Collateral Source Deductions in the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund,” 53 DePaul Law Rev. 393–416.Google Scholar
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, Tom R. (1988) The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luban, David (1995) “Settlements and the Erosion of the Public Realm,” 83 Georgetown Law J. 2619–62.Google Scholar
Mather, Lynn, & Yngvesson, Barbara (1980–1981) “Language, Audience and the Transformation of Dispute,” 15 Law & Society Rev. 775–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, Leon, & Reiss, Albert J. Jr. (1969) “The Social Organization of Legal Contacts,” 34 American Sociological Rev. 309–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle (1986) “Everyday Understandings of Law in Working-Class America,” 13 American Ethnologist 253–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle, & Silbey, Susan S. (1984) “What Do Plaintiffs Want? Reexamining the Concept of Dispute,” 9 The Justice System J. 151–78.Google Scholar
Miller, Richard E., & Sarat, Austin (1980–1981) “Grievances, Claims and Disputes: Assessing the Adversary Culture,” 15 Law & Society Rev. 525–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullenix, Linda (2004) “The Future of Tort Reform: Possible Lessons from the World Trade Center Victim Compensation Fund,” 53 Emory Law J. 1315–47.Google Scholar
Nader, Laura (1991) “Harmony Models and the Construction of Law,” in Avruch, K. et al. Conflict Resolution: Cross-Cultural Perspectives. New York: Greenwood.Google Scholar
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (2004) The 9/11 Commission Report. Government Report. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
National Opinion Research Center (2006) General Social Survey. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center.Google Scholar
Pateman, Carole (1970) Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peck, Robert S. (2003) “The Victim Compensation Fund: Born From a Unique Confluence of Events Not Likely to be Duplicated,” 53 DePaul Law Rev. 209–30.Google Scholar
Priest, George (2003) “The Problematic Structure of the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund,” 53 DePaul Law Rev. 527–46.Google Scholar
Rabin, Robert L. (2003) “The September 11th Victim Compensation Fund: A Circumscribed Response or an Auspicious Model?,” 53 DePaul Law Rev. 769–803.Google Scholar
Relis, Tamara (2002) “Civil Litigation from Litigants' Perspectives: What We Know and What We Don't Know About the Litigation Experience of Individual Litigants,” in Sarat, A., & Ewick, P., Studies in Law, Politics and Society. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Relis, Tamara (2007) “It's Not About the Money! A Theory on Misconceptions of Plaintiffs' Litigation Aims,” 68 University of Pittsburgh Law Rev. 701–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Resnik, Judith (1982) “Managerial Judges,” 96 Harvard Law Rev. 374–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Resnik, Judith (2000) “Trial as Error, Litigation as Injury: Transforming the Meaning of Article III,” 113 Harvard Law Rev. 924–1035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Resnik, Judith (2006) “Uncovering, Disclosing and Discovering How the Public Dimensions of Court-Based Processes Are at Risk,” 81 Chicago-Kent Law Rev. 521–70.Google Scholar
Schneider, Elizabeth M. (2003) “Grief, Procedure, and Justice: The September 11th Victim Compensation Fund,” 53 DePaul Law Rev. 457–500.Google Scholar
Shapo, Marshall S. (2005) Compensation for Victims of Terrorism. New York: Oceana.Google Scholar
Silbey, Susan S. (2005) “After Legal Consciousness,” 1 Annual Rev. of Law and Social Science 323–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skocpol, Theda (2004) Diminished Democracy: From Membership to Management in American Civic Life. Norman, OK: Univ. of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Trubek, David M., et al. (1983) Civil Litigation Research Project Final Report. Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin Law School.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. (1990) Why People Obey the Law: Procedural Justice, Legitimacy and Compliance. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. (2005) Readings in Procedural Justice. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R., & Huo, Yuen J. (2002) Trust in the Law: Encouraging Public Cooperation with the Police and Courts. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R., & Thorisdottir, Hulda (2003) “A Psychological Perspective on Compensation for Harm: Examining the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund,” 53 DePaul Law Rev. 355–91.Google Scholar

Statute Cited

Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act, P.L. 107-42 (2001).Google Scholar

Case Cited

In re September 11 Litigation, 280 F. Supp 279 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar