IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/oplwec/qt6t80b57r.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do the Merits Matter More? Class Actions under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act

Author

Listed:
  • Johnson, Marilyn F.
  • Nelson, Karen K.
  • Pritchard, Adam C.

Abstract

Congress passed the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 in an attempt to discourage meritless securities fraud class actions. This paper uses damages, accounting, insider trading and governance variables to explain the incidence of securities fraud litigation both before and after the passage of the PSLRA. Using a matched sample of sued and non-sued firms from the computer hardware and software industries, we find that accounting and insider trading, which did not correlate with the incidence of litigation prior to the passage of the PSLRA, are significant after the passage of PSLRA. This finding is confirmed by our analysis of allegations and outcomes. Our accounting variables do not explain the incidence of pre-PSLRA accounting allegations, but they become significant after the passage of PSLRA. Similarly, insider trading variables do not explain insider trading allegations before the PSLRA, but net sales by insiders correlate with such allegations after its enactment. Finally, we find no correlation between lawsuit outcomes and our accounting variables before the PSLRA, but accounting variables are significant after its enactment. Abnormal insider sales correlate with outcomes before the PSLRA, but not after. Overall, we interpret our finding as evidence that the PSLRA has furthered Congress' goal of discouraging frivilous securities fraud lawsuits.

Suggested Citation

  • Johnson, Marilyn F. & Nelson, Karen K. & Pritchard, Adam C., 2002. "Do the Merits Matter More? Class Actions under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt6t80b57r, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdl:oplwec:qt6t80b57r
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/6t80b57r.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marilyn F. Johnson & Ron Kasznik & Karen K. Nelson, 2001. "The Impact of Securities Litigation Reform on the Disclosure of Forward‐Looking Information By High Technology Firms," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 297-327, September.
    2. Francis, J & Philbrick, D & Schipper, K, 1994. "Shareholder Litigation And Corporate Disclosures," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 137-164.
    3. Greg Niehaus & Greg Roth, 1999. "Insider Trading, Equity Issues and CEO Turnover in Firms Subject to Securities Class Actions," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 28(4), Winter.
    4. James D. Beck & Sanjai Bhagat, 1997. "Shareholder litigation: share price movements, news releases, and settlement amounts," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(7-8), pages 563-586.
    5. Bernardo, Antonio E & Talley, Eric & Welch, Ivo, 2000. "A Theory of Legal Presumptions," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 1-49, April.
    6. Patricia M. Dechow & Richard G. Sloan & Amy P. Sweeney, 1996. "Causes and Consequences of Earnings Manipulation: An Analysis of Firms Subject to Enforcement Actions by the SEC," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 1-36, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Guido Friebel & Sergei Guriev, 2004. "Earnings Manipilation and Incentives in Firms," Working Papers w0055, New Economic School (NES), revised Oct 2005.
    2. Zhiyan Cao & Ganapathi Narayanamoorthy, 2005. "Accounting and Litigation Risk," Yale School of Management Working Papers amz2514, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Jul 2006.
    3. Zhiyan Cao & Ganapathi Narayanamoorthy, 2005. "Accounting and Litigation Risk," Yale School of Management Working Papers amz2514, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Jul 2006.

    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. 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).
    2. Dai, Lili & Fu, Renhui & Kang, Jun-Koo & Lee, Inmoo, 2016. "Corporate governance and the profitability of insider trading," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 235-253.
    3. Graham, John R. & Harvey, Campbell R. & Rajgopal, Shiva, 2005. "The economic implications of corporate financial reporting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-3), pages 3-73, December.
    4. Habib, Ahsan & Jiang, Haiyan & Bhuiyan, Md. Borhan Uddin & Islam, Ainul, 2014. "Litigation risk, financial reporting and auditing: A survey of the literature," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 145-163.
    5. Rogers, Jonathan L. & Van Buskirk, Andrew, 2009. "Shareholder litigation and changes in disclosure behavior," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1-2), pages 136-156, March.
    6. Agnes Cheng, C.S. & He Huang, Henry & Li, Yinghua & Lobo, Gerald, 2010. "Institutional monitoring through shareholder litigation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 356-383, March.
    7. Robert Jones & Yan Wu, 2010. "Executive compensation, earnings management and shareholder litigation," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 1-20, July.
    8. Omer Unsal & M. Kabir Hassan, 2020. "Employee lawsuits and capital structure," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 663-704, June.
    9. Kim, Irene & Skinner, Douglas J., 2012. "Measuring securities litigation risk," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 290-310.
    10. Carol Liu, M.H. & Zhuang, Zili, 2011. "Management earnings forecasts and the quality of analysts’ forecasts: The moderating effect of audit committees," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 31-45.
    11. Billings, Mary Brooke & Cedergren, Matthew C., 2015. "Strategic silence, insider selling and litigation risk," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 119-142.
    12. James Malm & Marcin Krolikowski, 2017. "Litigation risk and financial leverage," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 41(1), pages 180-194, January.
    13. Allen H. Huang & Jianghua Shen & Amy Y. Zang, 2022. "The unintended benefit of the risk factor mandate of 2005," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 1319-1355, December.
    14. Johnson, Marilyn F. & Nelson, Karen K. & Frankel, Richard M., 2002. "The Relation Between Auditor's Fees for Non-audit Services and Earnings Quality," Research Papers 1696r, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    15. Field, Laura & Lowry, Michelle & Shu, Susan, 2005. "Does disclosure deter or trigger litigation?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 487-507, September.
    16. Stephen J. Choi & A. C. Pritchard, 2016. "SEC Investigations and Securities Class Actions: An Empirical Comparison," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 27-49, March.
    17. Xiaoyu Cui & Jianlei Han & Jeong Bon Kim & Baolei Qi, 2024. "Federal judge ideology, securities class action litigation, and stock price crash risk," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 64(4), pages 4131-4155, December.
    18. Lonkani, Ravi, 2019. "Gender differences and managerial earnings forecast bias: Are female executives less overconfident than male executives?," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 18-34.
    19. Dan Amiram & Zahn Bozanic & James D. Cox & Quentin Dupont & Jonathan M. Karpoff & Richard Sloan, 2018. "Financial reporting fraud and other forms of misconduct: a multidisciplinary review of the literature," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 732-783, June.
    20. Ying Huang & Ningzhong Li & Yong Yu & Xiaolu Zhou, 2020. "The Effect of Managerial Litigation Risk on Earnings Warnings: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(5), pages 1161-1202, December.

    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:cdl:oplwec:qt6t80b57r. 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: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lebrkus.html .

    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.