Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Securities Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Securities Law

Brief For Professors James D. Cox Et Al. As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Stoneridge Investment Partners V. Scientific-Atlanta, No. 06-43 (U.S. June 11, 2007), Donald C. Langevoort Jun 2007

Brief For Professors James D. Cox Et Al. As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Stoneridge Investment Partners V. Scientific-Atlanta, No. 06-43 (U.S. June 11, 2007), Donald C. Langevoort

U.S. Supreme Court Briefs

No abstract provided.


The Missing Link Between Insider Trading And Securities Fraud, Richard A. Booth Mar 2007

The Missing Link Between Insider Trading And Securities Fraud, Richard A. Booth

Faculty Scholarship

In a recent article, I argued that diversified investors - the vast majority of investors - would prefer that securities fraud class actions under the 1934 Act and Rule 10b-5 be dismissed in the absence of insider trading or similar offenses during the fraud period. See Richard A. Booth, The End of the Securities Fraud Class Action as We Know It, 4 Berk. Bus. L. J. 1 (2007), http://ssrn.com/abstract=683197. In this article, I draw on the classic case, SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulfur Company, to show that the federal courts originally viewed securities fraud as inextricably connected to insider trading …


The Investor Compensation Fund, Alicia J. Davis Jan 2007

The Investor Compensation Fund, Alicia J. Davis

Alicia Davis

The prevailing view among securities regulation scholars is that compensating victims of secondary market securities fraud is inefficient. As the theory goes, diversified investors are as likely to be on the gaining side of a transaction tainted by fraud as the losing side. Therefore, such investors should have no expected net losses from fraud because their expected losses will be matched by expected gains. This Article argues that this view is flawed; even diversified investors can suffer substantial losses from fraud, presenting a compelling case for compensation.

The interest in compensation, however, should be advanced by better means than are …


Reforming Punishment Of Financial Reporting Fraud, Samuel W. Buell Jan 2007

Reforming Punishment Of Financial Reporting Fraud, Samuel W. Buell

Faculty Scholarship

Present sentencing law in criminal cases of financial reporting fraud is embarrassingly flawed. The problem is urgent given that courts are now regularly sentencing corporate offenders, sometimes (but sometimes not) to extremely punitive terms of imprisonment. Policing of fraud by multiple jurisdictions in a federal system means that principled sentencing law is necessary not only for first-order policy reasons but also for coordination of sanctioning efforts. Proportionality and rationality demand that sentencing law have an agreed scale for measuring cases of financial reporting fraud in relation to each other, a sound methodology for fixing a given case on that scale, …


The Investor Compensation Fund, Alicia J. Davis Jan 2007

The Investor Compensation Fund, Alicia J. Davis

Articles

The prevailing view among securities regulation scholars is that compensating victims of secondary market securities fraud is inefficient. As the theory goes, diversified investors are as likely to be on the gaining side of a transaction tainted by fraud as the losing side. Therefore, such investors should have no expected net losses from fraud because their expected losses will be matched by expected gains. This Article argues that this view is flawed; even diversified investors can suffer substantial losses from fraud, presenting a compelling case for compensation. The interest in compensation, however, should be advanced by better means than are …


On Leaving Corporate Executives "Naked, Homeless And Without Wheels": Corporate Fraud, Equitable Remedies, And The Debate Over Entity Versus Individual Liability, Donald C. Langevoort Jan 2007

On Leaving Corporate Executives "Naked, Homeless And Without Wheels": Corporate Fraud, Equitable Remedies, And The Debate Over Entity Versus Individual Liability, Donald C. Langevoort

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

There is a lively debate about the relative merits of entity versus individual liability in cases involving securities fraud. After reviewing this debate in the context of both private securities litigation and SEC enforcement, this paper considers whether the legal tools available against individual executives are adequate, and if not, what changes might be made. The main focus is on equitable remedies, especially rescission and restitution, under both state and federal law. As to the former, Vice Chancellor Strine’s opinion in In re Healthsouth offers an interesting template, although there are limits on the usefulness of derivative suits to police …