Person Communication and Meetings / Judicial Event / Product Recall / M&A / Product Issues / Bankruptcy / /
Facility
Northwestern University / University of South Carolina School / U.S. Court of Appeals / Supreme Court / /
IndustryTerm
insurance policy limits / real estate market / /
Organization
University of South Carolina School of Law / Northwestern University / Boston College / New York Court of Appeals / U.S. Supreme Court / U.S. Court of Appeals / UN Court / U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania / US Federal Reserve / Southeastern Association of Law Schools / Drug Enforcement Administration / /
Person
Chris Guthrie / Patrick A. Langan / Federal Rule / Justin H. Dion / David J. Levin / Colin Miller / William Burtigan / Thomas Mussweiler / Daniel Kahneman / Zoe / Dan Orr / Amos Tversky / Stephen C. Yeazell / Robert J. Condlin / Andrew E. Taslitz / Andrew Robertson / Jodi M. Brown / David A. Sklansky / Stephanos Bibas / /
Position
attorney / counsel / Caveat Prosecutor / prosecutor / speaker / cutor and defense counsel / Blog Editor / trial judge / Professor / opposing counsel / Assistant U.S. Attorney / Negotiator / judge / Associate Professor / lawyer / /
Product
plea / Versa / /
ProvinceOrState
Wyoming / New York / Connecticut / Tennessee / Pennsylvania / Rhode Island / Florida / Colorado / /
ANCHORS AWAY: WHY THE ANCHORING EFFECT SUGGESTS THAT JUDGES SHOULD BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN PLEA DISCUSSIONS Colin Miller* Abstract: The “anchoring effect” is a cognitive bias by which people evaluate numbers by foc