Comparative analysis of litigation outcomes has been restricted to advanced industrialized democracies. I extend the analysis to a developing country--the Philippines. The models of litigation outcomes for the United States and Great Britain suggest that courts favor the claims advanced by those with greater resources. Although income disparity is generally greater in developing nations, decisions of the Philippine Supreme Court suggest the opposite outcome--those with the least resources fare better. I argue that concerns for stability, legitimacy, and development in nonindustrialized systems lead to biases for those within society who have less. Courts in Third World nations can use their policy-making function to redistribute resources, at least within some components of their docket.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 95 citations exist upstream.