Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Two Faces Of Corporate Lobbying: Evidence From The Pharmaceutical Industry, Dongnyoung Kim, Incheol Kim, Omer Unsal
Two Faces Of Corporate Lobbying: Evidence From The Pharmaceutical Industry, Dongnyoung Kim, Incheol Kim, Omer Unsal
Finance Faculty Publications
This paper addresses two side effects of corporate lobbying on firm value in the pharmaceutical industry. Employing corporate lobbying and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval data for the period from 1998 to 2013, we find that lobbying firms have a 67.3 percent higher chance that their new prescription drugs are approved by the FDA than non-lobbying firms. On the 3-day window surrounding FDA approval announcements, lobbying firms yield, on average, a 1.1% higher market reaction than non-lobbying peers. However, we also find that insiders in lobbying firms abnormally purchase their own stocks prior to FDA approvals. These opportunistic …
The Reduced Form Of Litigation Models And The Plaintiff's Win Rate, Jonah B. Gelbach
The Reduced Form Of Litigation Models And The Plaintiff's Win Rate, Jonah B. Gelbach
All Faculty Scholarship
In this paper I introduce what I call the reduced form approach to studying the plaintiff's win rate in litigation selection models. A reduced form comprises a joint distribution of plaintiff's and defendant's beliefs concerning the probability that the plaintiff would win in the event a dispute were litigated; a conditional win rate function that tells us the actual probability of a plaintiff win in the event of litigation, given the parties' subjective beliefs; and a litigation rule that provides the probability that a case will be litigated given the two parties' beliefs. I show how models with very different-looking …
The Law And Economics Of Proportionality In Discovery, Jonah B. Gelbach, Bruce H. Kobayashi
The Law And Economics Of Proportionality In Discovery, Jonah B. Gelbach, Bruce H. Kobayashi
All Faculty Scholarship
This paper analyzes the proportionality standard in discovery. Many believe the Advisory Committee's renewed emphasis on this standard has the potential to infuse litigation practice with considerably more attention to questions related to the costs and benefits of discovery. We discuss the history and rationale of proportionality's inclusion in Rule 26, adopting an analytical framework that focuses on how costs and benefits can diverge in litigation generally, and discovery in particular. Finally, we use this framework to understand the mechanics and challenges involved in deploying the six factors included in the proportionality standard. Throughout, we emphasize that the proportionality standard …