{"title":"评析“过失死亡案件中的自我消费:死者还是家庭收入?”","authors":"K. Krueger","doi":"10.5085/JFE.24.1.109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a recent article in the Journal of Forensic Economics, Michael L. Brookshire and Frank L. Slesnick presented their analysis of the husband or wife decedent self-consumption literature. This comment presents two counter-arguments to their self-consumption methodology which renders their preference to the family income approach inconclusive. I first review the Brookshire and Slesnick make-whole damages doctrine and then I discuss the problems with forecasting household income.","PeriodicalId":265321,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forensic Economics","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comment on “Self-Consumption in Wrongful Death Cases: Decedent or Family Income?”\",\"authors\":\"K. Krueger\",\"doi\":\"10.5085/JFE.24.1.109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In a recent article in the Journal of Forensic Economics, Michael L. Brookshire and Frank L. Slesnick presented their analysis of the husband or wife decedent self-consumption literature. This comment presents two counter-arguments to their self-consumption methodology which renders their preference to the family income approach inconclusive. I first review the Brookshire and Slesnick make-whole damages doctrine and then I discuss the problems with forecasting household income.\",\"PeriodicalId\":265321,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Forensic Economics\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Forensic Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5085/JFE.24.1.109\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Forensic Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5085/JFE.24.1.109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
在《司法经济学杂志》(Journal of Forensic Economics)最近的一篇文章中，迈克尔·l·布鲁克希尔(Michael L. Brookshire)和弗兰克·l·斯莱斯尼克(Frank L. Slesnick)展示了他们对丈夫或妻子已故自我消费文献的分析。这一评论对他们的自我消费方法提出了两个相反的论点，这使得他们对家庭收入方法的偏好没有定论。我首先回顾了Brookshire和Slesnick的赔偿原则，然后讨论了预测家庭收入的问题。
A Comment on “Self-Consumption in Wrongful Death Cases: Decedent or Family Income?”
In a recent article in the Journal of Forensic Economics, Michael L. Brookshire and Frank L. Slesnick presented their analysis of the husband or wife decedent self-consumption literature. This comment presents two counter-arguments to their self-consumption methodology which renders their preference to the family income approach inconclusive. I first review the Brookshire and Slesnick make-whole damages doctrine and then I discuss the problems with forecasting household income.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
