- The Art, Craft, and Science of Policing
- Crime and Criminals
- Criminal Process and Prosecution
- The Crime-preventive Impact of Penal Sanctions
- Contracts and Corporations
- Financial Markets
- Consumer Protection
- Bankruptcy and Insolvency
- Regulating the Professions
- Personal Injury Litigation
- Claiming Behavior as Legal Mobilization
- Labor and Employment Laws
- Housing and Property
- Human Rights Instruments
- Social Security and Social Welfare
- Occupational Safety and Health
- Environmental Regulation
- Administrative Justice
- Access to Civil Justice
- Judicial Recruitment, Training and Careers
- Trial Courts and Adjudication
- Appellate Courts
- Dispute Resolution
- Lay Decision-Makers in the Legal Process
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure and Courts
- Collective Actions
- Law and Courts'Impact on Development and Democratization
- How Does Inter National Law Work?
- <b>Lawyers and Other Legal Service Providers</b>
- Legal Pluralism
- Public Images and Understandings of Courts
- Legal Education and the Legal Academy
Abstract and Keywords
This article analyzes the concept of the legal mobilization of laws and institutions for the redressal of “justiciable” problems—problems for which a remedy can potentially be obtained through legal processes. The dispute-processing approach initiates the naming, blaming, claiming framework, to understand the reasons that substantial “perceived injurious experiences” (PIE) do not mature into lawsuits. This article proceeds further with the discussion of the idea of a “dispute pyramid.” This method presents a real problem of asserting injuries that are unperceived, subjective in nature. Broad methodological approaches are applied in empirical research regarding claiming. The expansive methodological spectrum includes, structured surveys, institutional records ethnography etc. This article then examines the explanations that have been advanced for variations in claiming patterns, both at the individual and the aggregate levels. It analyses the points of general agreement and issues where agreement is lacking and proposes an agenda for future research related to claiming.
Herbert Kritzer is the Marvin J. Sonosky Chair of Law and Public Policy at the University of Minnesota Law School. He is Professor of Political Science and Law emeritus at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He has published numerous articles and several books, including Risks, Reputations, and Rewards (Stanford UP: 2004) and is the co-editor, with Susan Silbey, of In Litigation: Do the 'Haves' Still Come Out Ahead? (Stanford UP: 2003).
Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.
If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.