IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlawec/v50y2007p625-660.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Home Court Advantage in International Corporate Litigation

Author

Listed:
  • Utpal Bhattacharya
  • Neal Galpin
  • Bruce Haslem

Abstract

Using a comprehensive sample of 2,361 public U.S. corporate defendants and 715 public foreign corporate defendants in U.S. federal courts in the period 1995–2000, we find that the market reaction at the announcement of a U.S. federal lawsuit is less negative for U.S. corporate defendants than for foreign corporate defendants. We find that this market reaction is rational; U.S. firms are less likely to lose than are foreign firms when we control for year, industry, type of litigation, size, and profitability. This finding may still reflect a sample selection bias. We control for this bias, and the results remain unchanged. We thus cannot rule out that U.S. firms have a home court advantage in U.S. federal courts.

Suggested Citation

  • Utpal Bhattacharya & Neal Galpin & Bruce Haslem, 2007. "The Home Court Advantage in International Corporate Litigation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(4), pages 625-660.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:v:50:y:2007:p:625-660
    DOI: 10.1086/519817
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/519817
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/519817?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David M. Cutler & Lawrence H. Summers, 1988. "The Costs of Conflict Resolution and Financial Distress: Evidence from the Texaco-Pennzoil Litigation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 157-172, Summer.
    2. Bruce Haslem, 2005. "Managerial Opportunism during Corporate Litigation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(4), pages 2013-2041, August.
    3. Bizjak, John M & Coles, Jeffrey L, 1995. "The Effect of Private Antitrust Litigation on the Stock-Market Valuation of the Firm," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 436-461, June.
    4. Waldfogel, Joel, 1995. "The Selection Hypothesis and the Relationship between Trial and Plaintiff Victory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(2), pages 229-260, April.
    5. Doidge, Craig & Karolyi, G. Andrew & Stulz, Rene M., 2004. "Why are foreign firms listed in the U.S. worth more?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 205-238, February.
    6. Sanjai Bhagat & Roberta Romano, 2002. "Event Studies and the Law: Part I: Technique and Corporate Litigation," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 4(1), pages 141-168, January.
    7. Mark H. Lang & Karl V. Lins & Darius P. Miller, 2003. "ADRs, Analysts, and Accuracy: Does Cross Listing in the United States Improve a Firm's Information Environment and Increase Market Value?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 317-345, May.
    8. Salinger, Michael, 1992. "Standard Errors in Event Studies," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 39-53, March.
    9. Eisenberg, Theodore, 1990. "Testing the Selection Effect: A New Theoretical Framework with Empirical Tests," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(2), pages 337-358, June.
    10. Sanjai Bhagat & Roberta Romano, 2001. "Event Studies and the Law - Part I: Technique and Corporate Litigation," Yale School of Management Working Papers amz2475, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Jan 2002.
    11. George L. Priest & Benjamin Klein, 1984. "The Selection of Disputes for Litigation," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(1), pages 1-56, January.
    12. Fama, Eugene F, et al, 1969. "The Adjustment of Stock Prices to New Information," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, February.
    13. Sanjai Bhagat & John Bizjak & Jeffrey L. Coles, 1998. "The Shareholder Wealth Implications of Corporate Lawsuits," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 27(4), Winter.
    14. Hylton, Keith N, 1993. "Asymmetric Information and the Selection of Disputes for Litigation," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(1), pages 187-210, January.
    15. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    16. Karpoff, Jonathan M & Lott, John R, Jr, 1993. "The Reputational Penalty Firms Bear from Committing Criminal Fraud," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(2), pages 757-802, October.
    17. Ball, R & Brown, P, 1968. "Empirical Evaluation Of Accounting Income Numbers," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(2), pages 159-178.
    18. Engelmann, Kathleen & Cornell, Bradford, 1988. "Measuring the Cost of Corporate Litigation: Five Case Studies," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(2), pages 377-399, June.
    19. Shavell, Steven, 1996. "Any Frequency of Plaintiff Victory at Trial Is Possible," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(2), pages 493-501, June.
    20. Sanjai Bhagat & Roberta Romano, 2002. "Event Studies and the Law: Part II: Empirical Studies of Corporate Law," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 4(2), pages 380-423.
    21. Siegel, Jordan, 2005. "Can foreign firms bond themselves effectively by renting U.S. securities laws?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 319-359, February.
    22. Sanjai Bhagat & Roberta Romano, "undated". "Event Studies and the Law: Part II--Empirical Studies and Corporate Law," Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy Working Paper Series yale_lepp-1019, Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy.
    23. Perloff, Jeffrey M & Rubinfeld, Daniel L & Ruud, Paul, 1996. "Antitrust Settlements and Trial Outcomes," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(3), pages 401-409, August.
    24. Sanjai Bhagat & Roberta Romano, "undated". "Event Studies and the Law--Part I: Technique and Corporate Litigation," Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy Working Paper Series yale_lepp-1021, Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy.
    25. Karpoff, Jonathan M & Lott, John R, Jr, 1999. "On the Determinants and Importance of Punitive Damage Awards," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(1), pages 527-573, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael Firth & Oliver M. Rui & Wenfeng Wu, 2011. "The Effects of Political Connections and State Ownership on Corporate Litigation in China," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(3), pages 573-607.
    2. Omer Unsal & M. Kabir Hassan, 2020. "Employee lawsuits and capital structure," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 663-704, June.
    3. Gokhale, Jayendra & Brooks, Raymond M. & Tremblay, Victor J., 2014. "The effect on stockholder wealth of product recalls and government action: The case of Toyota's accelerator pedal recall," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 521-528.
    4. Armour, John & Mayer, Colin & Polo, Andrea, 2017. "Regulatory Sanctions and Reputational Damage in Financial Markets," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(4), pages 1429-1448, August.
    5. Daniel Martin Katz & Michael J Bommarito II & Tyler Soellinger & James Ming Chen, 2015. "Law on the Market? Abnormal Stock Returns and Supreme Court Decision-Making," Papers 1508.05751, arXiv.org, revised May 2017.
    6. Blake Rayfield & Omer Unsal, 2021. "Institutional monitoring and litigation risk: Evidence from employee disputes," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 44(1), pages 81-119, April.
    7. Sanjai Bhagat & Roberta Romano, 2001. "Event Studies and the Law - Part I: Technique and Corporate Litigation," Yale School of Management Working Papers amz2475, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Jan 2002.
    8. Kuang-Hsun Shih & Fu-Ju Yang & Jhih-Ta Shih & Yi-Hsien Wang, 2020. "Patent Litigation, Competitive Dynamics, and Stock Market Volatility," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-17, May.
    9. Michael Cichello & Douglas Lamdin, 2006. "Event Studies and the Analysis of Antitrust," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 229-245.
    10. Unsal, Omer, 2019. "Employee relations and firm risk: Evidence from court rooms," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 1-16.
    11. Sanjai Bhagat & Roberta Romano, "undated". "Event Studies and the Law--Part I: Technique and Corporate Litigation," Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy Working Paper Series yale_lepp-1021, Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy.
    12. Lin, Chien-Chung & Wu, Huan-Ting, 2019. "How to test an insider trading law and its effectiveness: Price movements and comparative empirical data from Taiwan," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 22-36.
    13. Blake Rayfield & Omer Unsal, 2019. "Institutional Monitoring and Litigation Risk: Evidence from Employee Disputes," NFI Working Papers 2019-WP-02, Indiana State University, Scott College of Business, Networks Financial Institute.
    14. Kafouros, Mario & Aliyev, Murod & Krammer, Sorin M.S., 2021. "Do firms profit from patent litigation? The contingent roles of diversification and intangible assets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    15. Daniel P. Kessler & Daniel L. Rubinfeld, 2004. "Empirical Study of the Civil Justice System," NBER Working Papers 10825, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Malm, James & Adhikari, Hari P. & Krolikowski, Marcin W. & Sah, Nilesh B., 2021. "The old guard: CEO age and corporate litigation," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(C).
    17. Wei, Zuobao & Xie, Feixue & Posthuma, Richard A., 2011. "Does it pay to pollute? Shareholder wealth consequences of corporate environmental lawsuits," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 212-218, September.
    18. Liu, Chelsea & Aharony, Joseph & Richardson, Grant & Yawson, Alfred, 2016. "Corporate litigation and changes in CEO reputation: Guidance from U.S. Federal Court lawsuits," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 15-34.
    19. Ian Keay & Cherie Metcalf, 2011. "Property Rights, Resource Access, and Long‐Run Growth," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), pages 792-829, December.
    20. T. S. Raghu & Wonseok Woo & S. B. Mohan & H. Raghav Rao, 2008. "Market reaction to patent infringement litigations in the information technology industry," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 61-75, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:v:50:y:2007:p:625-660. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLE .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.