Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Attorney fees (1)
- Civil procedure (1)
- Class action (1)
- Class actions (1)
- Complex litigation (1)
-
- Empirical legal studies (1)
- FRCP (1)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1)
- Fiduciary duty (1)
- Forum selection (1)
- In re Vivendi Universal (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- M&A (1)
- Mergers & acquisitions (1)
- Mootness dismissal (1)
- Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd. (1)
- Rule 10b-5 (1)
- S.A. (1)
- SCOTUS (1)
- Securities Act of 1934 (1)
- Securities law (1)
- Shareholders (1)
- Standing (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- Takeover law (1)
- Transnational securities fraud litigation (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Litigation
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 …
Mootness Fees, Matthew D. Cain, Jill E. Fisch, Steven Davidoff Solomon, Randall Thomas
Mootness Fees, Matthew D. Cain, Jill E. Fisch, Steven Davidoff Solomon, Randall Thomas
All Faculty Scholarship
In response to a sharp increase in litigation challenging mergers, the Delaware Chancery Court issued the 2016 Trulia decision, which substantively reduced the attractiveness of Delaware as a forum for these suits. In this Article, we empirically assess the response of plaintiffs’ attorneys to these developments. Specifically, we document a troubling trend—the flight of merger litigation to federal court where these cases are overwhelmingly resolved through voluntary dismissals that provide no benefit to the plaintiff class but generate a payment to plaintiffs’ counsel in the form of a mootness fee. In 2018, for example, 77% of deals with litigation were …