arbiter
JournalsAccount

Should Lawyers Lie to Their Clients? Biased Expertise in Negotiations

Danisz Okulicz

American Law and Economics Review2025https://doi.org/10.1093/aler/ahaf002article
AJG 2ABDC B
Weight
0.50

Abstract

I propose a theoretical model to analyze the effects of cheap-talk legal advice on pretrial negotiations with asymmetric information when a conflict of interest between plaintiffs and attorneys is possible. An informed defendant makes a settlement offer to an uninformed plaintiff who may consult her attorney before taking the decision. Hiring an attorney biased against going to trial does not affect the outcome of the negotiations. Conversely, hiring an attorney biased towards going to trial improves the settlement offers received by the plaintiff. Negotiations fail only when the conflict of interest between the plaintiff and the attorney is extreme. Typically the plaintiff is able to separate the defendant with high liability value from the defendant with low liability value without trial. The incentives of the agents can depend on contracts that specify the attorney’s fees. Optimal contracts always result in some conflict of interest. Commonly used contingency-fee and hourly-fee contracts are optimal for some parameters of the model. Contracts which perfectly align the incentives of the agents are feasible but never optimal.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/aler/ahaf002

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{danisz2025,
  title        = {{Should Lawyers Lie to Their Clients? Biased Expertise in Negotiations}},
  author       = {Danisz Okulicz},
  journal      = {American Law and Economics Review},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/aler/ahaf002},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Should Lawyers Lie to Their Clients? Biased Expertise in Negotiations

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.