Changes

To summarize Ronald Coase's paper ''The Problem of Social Cost'',<ref>Available online for $10 at this [https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/466560 University of Chicago website]</ref> a judge should have regard for the total effect of his decision once people adapt to it.  Professor Coase's famous paper<ref>Coase, R. October 1960 ''[http://www.sfu.ca/~allen/CoaseJLE1960.pdf The Problem of Social Cost.]'' Journal of Law and Economics</ref> observes that assigning a property right to one side in a dispute typically does not alter the economically efficient use of resources, as long as parties can easily bargain with each other.

To summarize Ronald Coase's paper ''The Problem of Social Cost'',<ref>Available online for $10 at this [https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/466560 University of Chicago website]</ref> a judge should have regard for the total effect of his decision once people adapt to it.  Professor Coase's famous paper<ref>Coase, R. October 1960 ''[http://www.sfu.ca/~allen/CoaseJLE1960.pdf The Problem of Social Cost.]'' Journal of Law and Economics</ref> observes that assigning a property right to one side in a dispute typically does not alter the economically efficient use of resources, as long as parties can easily bargain with each other.

Only eleven (11) court decisions -- and none by the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] -- have cited the "Coase theorem," and many of those citations are to law review articles that merely include the Coase theorem in their titles.  The paucity of references to the insightful Coase theorem in legal decisions says more about the court system than it does about the theorem.  Law schools generally either ignore the Coase theorem, or are outspokenly hostile to its truth.

Only one judge -- and none on the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] -- has ever cited the "Coase theorem" in a court opinion, and he did so only twice.<ref>A few additional judges have included in their opinions citations to law review articles that have the Coase theorem in their titles.</ref> The paucity of references to the insightful Coase theorem in legal decisions says more about the court system than it does about the brilliant theorem.  Law schools generally either ignore the Coase theorem, or are outspokenly hostile to its truth.

In 1997 federal district judge Milton Shadur observed the following in one of his opinions when he presided over a case on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit:<ref>''Coltman v. Commissioner'', 980 F.2d 1134, 1136-37 (7th Cir. 1992)</ref>

Federal district judge Milton Shadur observed the following in a decision when he presided over a case as part of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit:<ref>''Coltman v. Commissioner'', 980 F.2d 1134, 1136-37 (7th Cir. 1992)</ref>

{{cquote|It provides a classic illustration of the Coase Theorem, which has earned Professor Ronald Coase a long-belated but much-deserved Nobel Prize: So long as the rule of law is known when parties act, the ultimate economic result is the same no matter which way the law has resolved the issue.}}

{{cquote|It provides a classic illustration of the Coase Theorem, which has earned Professor Ronald Coase a long-belated but much-deserved Nobel Prize: So long as the rule of law is known when parties act, the ultimate economic result is the same no matter which way the law has resolved the issue.}}