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

Law Commons

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

Securities Law

Rule 10b-5

Series

2006

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Reforming The Securities Class Action: On Deterrence And Its Implementation, John C. Coffee Jr. Jan 2006

Reforming The Securities Class Action: On Deterrence And Its Implementation, John C. Coffee Jr.

Faculty Scholarship

Securities class actions impose enormous penalties, but they achieve little compensation and only limited deterrence. This is because of a basic circularity underlying the securities class action: When damages are imposed on the corporation, they essentially fall on diversified shareholders, thereby producing mainly pocket-shifting wealth transfers among shareholders. The current equilibrium benefits corporate insiders, insurers, and plaintiffs' attorneys, but not investors. The appropriate answer to this problem is not to abandon securities litigation, but to shift the incidence of its penalties so that, in the secondary market context, they fall less on the corporation and more on those actors who …


Merrill Lynch V. Dabit: Federal Preemption Of Holders' Class Actions, Mark J. Loewenstein Jan 2006

Merrill Lynch V. Dabit: Federal Preemption Of Holders' Class Actions, Mark J. Loewenstein

Publications

No abstract provided.


After Dura: Causation In Fraud-On-The-Market Actions, Merritt B. Fox Jan 2006

After Dura: Causation In Fraud-On-The-Market Actions, Merritt B. Fox

Faculty Scholarship

On April 19, 2005, the Supreme Court announced its unanimous opinion in Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo, concerning what a plaintiff must show to establish causation in a Rule lob-5 fraud-on-the-market suit for damages. The opinion had been awaited with considerable anticipation, being described at the time of oral argument in the Financial Times, for example, as the "most important securities case in a decade." After the opinion was handed down, a representative of the plaintiffs' bar lauded it as a "unanimous ruling protecting investors' ability to sue." A representative of the defendants' bar equally enthusiastically hailed it as "a …