Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Follow The Money? A Proposed Approach For Disclosure Of Litigation Finance Agreements, Maya Steinitz
Follow The Money? A Proposed Approach For Disclosure Of Litigation Finance Agreements, Maya Steinitz
Faculty Scholarship
Litigation finance is the new and fast-growing practice by which a non-party funds a plaintiff’s litigation either for-profit or for some other motivation. Some estimates placed the size of the litigation finance market at 50–100 billion dollars. Both proponents and opponents of this newly -emergent phenomenon are in agreement that the it is the most important development in civil justice of this era. Litigation finance is already transforming civil litigation at the level of the single case as well as, incrementally, at the level of the civil justice system as a whole. It is also beginning to transform the way …
Deceptively Simple: The Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Margaret E. Rushing
Deceptively Simple: The Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Margaret E. Rushing
Arkansas Law Review
In the 2017 legislative session, the Arkansas General Assembly significantly changed the Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (“ADTPA”). These changes now prohibit private class actions under the ADTPA and require plaintiffs to prove additional elements of reliance and actual financial loss when bringing a claim. The changes appear to limit the ability of a consumer to bring a private action under the ADPTA. With these changes, Arkansas joins a minority of jurisdictions with deceptive trade practices acts that increase a plaintiff’s burden and restrict private class actions.
The Myth Of Morrison: Securities Fraud Litigation Against Foreign Issuers, Robert Bartlett, Matthew D. Cain, Jill E. Fisch, Steven Davidoff Solomon
The Myth Of Morrison: Securities Fraud Litigation Against Foreign Issuers, Robert Bartlett, Matthew D. Cain, Jill E. Fisch, Steven Davidoff Solomon
All Faculty Scholarship
Using a sample of 388 securities fraud lawsuits filed between 2002 and 2017 against foreign issuers, we examine the effect of the Supreme Court's decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd. We find that the description of Morrison as a steamroller, substantially ending litigation against foreign issuers, is a myth. Instead, we find that Morrison did not significantly change the type of litigation brought against foreign issuers, which, both before and after this case, focused on foreign issuers with a U.S. listing and substantial U.S. trading volume. Although dismissal rates rose post-Morrison, we find no evidence …