Jennifer Robbennolt

Jennifer Robbennolt

Illinois Law Professor Jennifer Robbennolt is an expert in the areas of psychology and law, torts, and dispute resolution. Her research integrates psychology into the study of law and legal institutions, focusing primarily on legal decision-making and the use of empirical research methodology in law.

Professor Robbennolt is co-author of several books, including The Psychology of Tort Law; Psychology for Lawyers: Understanding the Human Factors in Negotiation, Litigation, and Decision Making; a textbook on Empirical Methods in Law (with Illinois colleagues Robert M. Lawless and Thomas S. Ulen); and the influential casebook, Dispute Resolution and Lawyers.

A graduate with highest honors of the University of Nebraska College of Law, Professor Robbennolt also earned master’s and doctoral degrees in social psychology from the University of Nebraska. Before joining the faculty at the University of Illinois, Professor Robbennolt was associate dean for faculty research and development, associate professor, and senior fellow in the Center for the Study of Dispute Resolution at the University of Missouri-Columbia School of Law. She has also served as a research associate and lecturer at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and at Princeton University’s Department of Psychology and as a law clerk to the Honorable John M. Gerrard of the Nebraska Supreme Court.

Columns by Jennifer Robbennolt

Sorry Studies

Illinois Law professors Lesley Wexler and Jennifer Robbennolt respond to a recent op-ed by Professor Cass Sunstein, in which Sunstein suggests that an apology is a risky strategy for a public figure seeking election or re-election. Wexler and Robbennolt point out three troubling aspects of Sunstein’s op-ed and argue that rather than abstain from giving apologies altogether, perhaps public figures should study apologies and learn how to give—and live—a good one.

Exploring Cy Pres, Restorative Justice, and Earned Redemption through Fleabag: Part II in a Series

In this second of a series of columns, Illinois law professors Lesley Wexler, Jennifer Robbennolt, and Jennie Pahre continue their discussion of the legal mechanism of cy pres—by which a court decides a remedy based on how closely it serves the intended purpose (originally from the law of trusts). The authors draw upon the plot and characters of the television show Fleabag to illustrate how restorative justice might help re-center the #MeToo debate away from its seemingly sole punitive focus and more towards the twin purposes of victim restoration and deterrence.

Cy Pres and Restorative Justice: Part I in a Series

In this first of a series of columns, Illinois law professors Jennie Pahre, Jennifer Robbennolt, and Lesley Wexler discuss the legal mechanism of cy pres—by which a court decides a remedy based on how closely it serves the intended purpose (originally from the law of trusts)—a mechanism the U.S. Supreme Court has expressed interest in resolving but about which the Court (in a per curiam opinion) described some reservations. The authors offer restorative justice as a way to answer some of those lingering questions about the remedy and to better tie cy pres to its intended purposes.