Legal regimes, audit quality and investment

Accounting Review

Volumn 72, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 385-406

  Schwartz, Rachel ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Audit quality; Auditors' liability; Damage measures; Investment

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031287367     PISSN: 00014826     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Alexander, J. 1991. Do the merits matter? A study of settlements in securities class actions. Stanford Law Review (February): 497-598.
2. Antle, R. and B. Nalebuff. 1991. Conservatism and auditor-client negotiations. Journal of Accounting Research 29 (Supplement): 31-54.
3. Auditing Standards Board. 1981. Audit Sampling. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 39. New York, NY: AICPA.
4. Balachandran, B. V., and N. J. Nagarajan. 1987. Imperfect information, insurance, and auditors' legal liability. Contemporary Accounting Research 3 (Spring): 281-301.
5. Dopuch, N., and R. King. 1992. Negligence versus strict liability regimes in auditing: An experimental investigation. The Accounting Review 67 (January): 97-120.
6. Dye, R. A. 1993. Auditing standards, legal liability, and auditor wealth. Journal of Political Economy 101: 887-914.
7. -. 1995. An economic perspective on auditors' liability. Presented at the Conference on Auditor and Director & Officer Liability for Misstated Financial Statements. Business, Law and Economics Center, Washington University.
8. Francis, J., D. Philbrick, and K. Schipper. 1994. Shareholder litigation and corporate disclosures. Journal of Accounting Research 32 (Autumn): 137-164.
9. Kanodia, C., and A. Mukherji. 1996. Real effects of separating investment and operating cash flows. Review of Accounting Studies 1 (1): 51-71.
10. Landes, W. M, and R. A. Posner. 1987. The Economic Structure of Tort Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11. Lys, T. and R. Watts. 1994. Lawsuits against auditors. Journal of Accounting Research (Supplement): 65-93.
12. Melumad, N. D., and L. Thoman. 1990. On auditors and the courts in an adverse selection setting. Journal of Accounting Research 28 (Spring): 77-120.
13. Narayanan, V. G. 1994. An analysis of auditor liability rules. Journal of Accounting Research (Supplement): 39-59.
14. Nelson, J., J. Ronen, and L. White. 1988. Legal liabilities and the market for auditing services. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance 3: 255-295.
15. Palmrose, Z. 1994. The joint & several vs. proportionate liability debate: An empirical investigation of audit-related litigation. Stanford Journal of Law, Business & Finance (Fall): 53-72.
16. Polinsky, M. A. 1989. An Introduction to Law and Economics. 2nd edition. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.
17. -, and Y. Che. 1991. Decoupling liability: Optimal incentives for care and litigation. Rand Journal of Economics 22 (Winter): 562-570.
18. Posner, R. A. 1992. Economic Analysis of Law. 4th edition. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.
19. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Public Law No. 104-167.
20. Rogerson, W. P. 1984. Efficient reliance and damage measures for breach of contract. Rand Journal of Economics 15: 39-53.
21. Sarath, B., and M. A. Wolfson. 1993. Auditing, litigation and the volume of trade in a market framework. Working paper, Stanford University.
22. Schwartz, R. 1997. Auditors' liability, vague due care and auditing standards. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting (forthcoming).
23. Shavell, S. 1980a. Damage measures for breach of contract. Bell Journal of Economics 11 (Autumn): 466-490.
24. -. 1980b. Strict liability versus negligence. The Journal of Legal Studies 9 (January): 1-25.
25. Shibano, T. 1995. Overguarding the guardians: Increasing auditor liability decreases new investment. Journal of Accounting and Economics (forthcoming).
26. Smith, R., and D. Tidrick. 1997. The effect of alternative judicial systems on auditing. Working paper, University of Oregon.