Tort Hypothetical The tort hypothetical needs one adjustment I think Scenario Three reads If a cause of action does not exist and the damage equals 100 while the cost of the wall equals 50 the wall will exist Even though 2 can not win the lawsuit he or she will still pay 1 some amount between 51 and 99 to build the wall This doesn t seem correct If a cause of action does not exist 2 can not shift the 100 cost onto 1 so 2 is faced with two options incur the 100 damage or pay a lower amount to avoid that damage by constructing a wall or having a wall constructed The utility maximizing choice would be to pay 50 to build the wall herself She wouldn t pay more than that to have 1 build the wall