Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United States (1)
- Agency cost (1)
- Basic Inc. v. Levinson (1)
- Causes of action (1)
- Class actions (1)
-
- Congress (1)
- Corporate governance (1)
- Corporate valuation (1)
- Damages (1)
- Deceit (1)
- Deterrence (1)
- Enron (1)
- Fraud (1)
- Fraud on the market (1)
- Frivolous lawsuits (1)
- Insider trading (1)
- Investment (1)
- Investors (1)
- Law reform (1)
- Legislative history (1)
- Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (1)
- Remedies (1)
- Securities regulation (1)
- Stocks (1)
- Stoneridge Investment Partners LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta Inc. (1)
- Trials (1)
- United States Supreme Court (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Securities Law
Do Investors In Controlled Firms Value Insider Trading Laws? International Evidence, Laura Nyantung Beny
Do Investors In Controlled Firms Value Insider Trading Laws? International Evidence, Laura Nyantung Beny
Articles
This article characterizes insider trading as an agency problem in firms that have a controlling shareholder. Using a standard agency model of corporate value diversion through insider trading by the controlling shareholder, I derive testable hypotheses about the relationship between corporate value and insider trading laws among such firms. The article tests these hypotheses using firm-level cross-sectional data from twenty-seven developed countries. The results show that stringent insider trading laws and enforcement are associated with greater corporate valuation among the sample firms in common law countries, a result that is consistent with the claim that insider trading laws mitigate agency …
Stoneridge Investment Partners V. Scientific-Atlanta: The Political Economy Of Securities Class Action Reform, Adam C. Pritchard
Stoneridge Investment Partners V. Scientific-Atlanta: The Political Economy Of Securities Class Action Reform, Adam C. Pritchard
Articles
I begin in Part II by explaining the wrong turn that the Court took in Basic. The Basic Court misunderstood the function of the reliance element and its relation to the question of damages. As a result, the securities class action regime established in Basic threatens draconian sanctions with limited deterrent benefit. Part III then summarizes the cases leading up to Stoneridge and analyzes the Court's reasoning in that case. In Stoneridge, like the decisions interpreting the reliance requirement of Rule 10b-5 that came before it, the Court emphasized policy implications. Sometimes policy implications are invoked to broaden the reach …