MacCoun, R. J. (1996). Differential treatment of corporate defendants by juries: An examination of the ‘deep pockets’ hypothesis. Law and Society Review, 30, 121-161.

Evidence that juries treat corporate defendants less favorably than individual defendants is often cited in support of the widely held view that juries are biased against wealthy "deep-pocket" defendants. Such evidence confounds defendant wealth and defendant identity. In 2 juror simulation experiments involving citizens on jury duty (n = 256 and 209, respectively), these factors were separated by manipulating whether defendants were described as poor individuals, wealthy individuals (WIs), or corporations (COs); the defendant's assets were described identically in the latter 2 conditions. In Exp 1, liability was significantly more likely, and awards were significantly greater, for COs than for WIs but verdicts against poor vs WIs did not differ. In Exp 2, awards were larger against WIs engaged in commercial rather than personal activities, and awards in the personal activity condition were larger against COs than WIs. There was little evidence for a defendant wealth effect on juror judgments.