Rating: 
Summary: Expensive, but a good investment
Review: This is a nice textbook. If you're looking for a good introduction to the field of law and economics intermediate between Mercuro/Medema's _Economics and the Law_ (low brainstrain) and Thomas Miceli's _Economics of the Law_ (high brainstrain), this one is a good choice.One of the things I especially like about Cooter and Ulen's approach is that they are careful _not_ to reduce law to economics (or vice versa, for that matter). Their claim is simply that law and economics have a lot to learn from one another. And this claim is hard to argue with, no matter what other criticisms I might make about some parts of the law-and-economics movement. For example, people who work with the law may tend to think of law as a means (solely) of securing justice, unaware that law also provides a complex structure of what economists would call "incentives" which promote what economists would call "efficiency". On the other hand, economists may tend to take for granted the existence of such institutions as property rights and contracts, and the meaning of such terms as "voluntary." These things are not as simple as they appear (as any first-year law student could tell you, although lots of "pop libertarians" probably couldn't), and legal scholarship has developed a lot of machinery for dealing with them. So this textbook, after a short opening chapter, devotes two not-overlong and altogether mainstream summary-and-overview chapters to, respectively, microeconomic theory and law. This means that a reader from either discipline can learn the basics of the other before proceeding to the meat of the analysis. Then the real work starts. Cooter and Ulen do a thorough job of presenting, in a readable and accessible manner, the basics of the economic analysis of the law of property, torts, contracts, legal procedure, crime, and all the other neat stuff on which the law-and-economics movement has based its reputation -- i.e., the application of economic theory to the study of law beyond the traditional bounds of, e.g., antitrust and other areas of law directly concerned with economics. It's designed to be eminently readable. Judgments like the one I'm about to render are notoriously subjective, but overall, the text strikes me as a good mix of clear expository prose, a well-chosen range of helpful examples, sound theory, and audience-appropriate mathematics (algebra and graphing). More advanced texts -- e.g. the aforementioned Miceli, and _Introduction to Law and Economics by A. Mitchell Polinsky -- are harder to read than this one unless you've got some math background. (Polinsky doesn't actually _use_ all that much math, but I think readers without some mathematical experience will find his book more difficult reading than this one.) References abound; every chapter closes with at least a handful of them. So the text also doubles as a bibliography and introduction to what is rapidly becoming a vast literature. If you're introducing yourself to the field, this book is a good investment. If you have a sufficiently strong background in mathematics, you _may_ be able to start with either Miceli or Polinsky (or both) and give this one a pass. But you'll miss a lot of helpful introductory discussion. Besides, this book has been something of a classic in the field ever since it was first published. If you have any interest in this field at all, you'll probably want to pick up a copy eventually. (It will probably _not_ help you much in law school, by the way, at least in the beginning. If you're just looking for an introduction to law and economics sufficient to get you started as a law student, I recommend Mercuro/Medema. You can go on to Posner and Landes and Shavell and Calabresi and the rest of them later.)
| 
