Securities Price Consequences of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and Related Events

Accounting Review

Volumn 76, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 431-460

  Ali, Ashiq ^a   Kallapur, Sanjay ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

aiding and abetting of securities fraud; Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995; Proposition 211 on the 1996 California state ballot; shareholders

Indexed keywords

EID: 23044528233     PISSN: 00014826     EISSN: 15587967     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/accr.2001.76.3.431     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Abate, T. 1996. Prop. 211 opponents to push on: Leaders say win makes Silicon Valley an emerging force in state politics. San Francisco Examiner (November 6): A25.
2. Avery, J. 1996. Securities litigation reform: The long and winding road to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The Business Lawyer 51 (February): 335–378.
3. Banz, R. 1981. The relationship between return and market value of common stocks. Journal of Financial Economics 9 (1): 3–18.
4. Bencivenga, D. 1996. War over class actions: California ballot seeks to undo reforms. New York Law Journal (October 10): 5.
5. Bernard, V. L. 1987. Cross-sectional dependence and problems in inferences in market based accounting research. Journal of Accounting Research 25 (2): 1–48.
6. Binder, J. 1985. Measuring the effects of regulation with stock price data. Rand Journal of Economics 16 (2): 167–183.
7. Carleton, W., M. Weisbach, and E. Weiss. 1996. Securities class action lawsuits: A descriptive study. Arizona Law Review 38 (2): 491–511.
8. Collins, D. W., M. S. Rozeff, and W. K. Salatka. 1982. The SEC’s rejection of SFAS No. 19: Test of market price reversal. The Accounting Review 57 (1): 1–17.
9. Corcoran, E. 1996. California voters reject Proposition 211: Silicon Valley fought measure making shareholder fraud suits easier. Washington Post (November 7): D3.
10. Donovan, K. 1996. War over securities bill heats up in California. National Law Journal (October 21): A6.
11. Dow Jones News Service. 1995a House override attempt: Two-thirds majority seen. 10:59 AM. (December 20).
12. Dow Jones News Service. 1995b. House overrides veto: Senate fight likely. 1:14 PM. (December 20).
13. Dow Jones News Service. 1998a. Senate passes bill to stop state securities class actions. 7:40 PM. (May 13).
14. Dow Jones News Service. 1998b. House votes to restrict investor suits in state courts. 5:30 PM. (July 22).
15. Dow Jones News Service. 1998c. Senate clears national standard for shareholder suits. 6:42 PM. (October 13).
16. Dow Jones News Service. 1998d. Congress adopts securities litigation reform bill. 7:08 PM. (October 13).
17. Dunbar, F., V. Juneja, and D. Martin. 1995. Shareholder litigation: Deterrent value, merit, and litigants’ options. Working paper, Washington University Business, Law, and Economics Center.
18. Ferguson, T. W. 1994. A contract to restore contract to securities law. Wall Street Journal (October 25): A17.
19. Foster, G. 1980. Accounting policy decisions and capital market research. Journal of Accounting and Economics 2 (1): 29–62.
20. Fournier, R. 1995. Clinton vetoes bill to restrict securities fraud suits. Associated Press (December 20).
21. Francis, J., D. Philbrick, and K. Schipper. 1994a. Shareholder litigation and corporate disclosures. Journal of Accounting Research 32 (2): 137–164.
22. Francis, J., D. Philbrick, and K. Schipper. 1994b. Determinants and outcomes in class action securities litigation. Working paper, University of Chicago.
23. Frisby, M. K. and J. Taylor. 1995a. Clinton likely to sign suit limits. Wall Street Journal (December 12): A3.
24. Frisby, M. K. and J. Taylor. 1995b. Clinton vetoes bill limiting securities suits. Wall Street Journal (December 20): A3.
25. Frisby, M. K. and J. Taylor. 1995c. Senate poised to override securities veto. Wall Street Journal (December 22): A3.
26. Glassman, J. K. 1996. Stock market scenarios in search of an election. Washington Post (November 3): H1.
27. Grundfest, J., and M. Perino. 1997. Securities litigation reform: The first year’s experience. Working paper, Stanford Law School.
28. Gunnison, R. B. 1996. Prop. 209 lead dwindles, poll also shows Prop. 211 trailing for the first time. San Francisco Chronicle (October 30): A1.
29. Hamilton, J. 1996. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: Law and Explanation. Chicago, IL: CCH Incorporated.
30. Henriques, D. B. 1995a. Parties clash at hearing on securities litigation. The New York Times (January 20): D2.
31. Henriques, D. 1995b. S.E.C. chief assails bill restricting litigation. The New York Times (January 26): D2.
32. Jain, P. 1986. Analyses of the distribution of security market model prediction errors for daily returns data. Journal of Accounting Research 24 (1): 76–96.
33. Johnson, M., R. Kasznik, and K. Nelson. 2000. Shareholder wealth effects of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Review of Accounting Studies 5 (3): 217–233.
34. Jones, C. L., and S. E. Weingram. 1996. The determinants of 10b-5 litigation risk. Working paper, Stanford Law School.
35. Kansas, D. 1995. Budget, economic ills clobber market. Wall Street Journal (December 19): C1.
36. Karpoff, J., and P. Malatesta. 1989. The wealth effects of second-generation state takeover legislation. Journal of Financial Economics 25 (2): 291–322.
37. King, R. R., and R. Schwartz. 1997. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: A discussion of three provisions. Accounting Horizons 11 (1): 92–106.
38. Kraakman, R., H. Park, and S. Shavell. 1994. When are shareholder suits in shareholder interests? Georgetown Law Journal 82: 1733–1775.
39. Lev, B. 1995. Disclosure and shareholder litigation. California Management Review 37 (3): 8–28.
40. Meyerson, B. 1996. California ballot initiative adds wild card to election day. The Associated Press (November 3).
41. National Journal’s Congress Daily. 1995. Clinton officially undecided on securities measure. (December 19).
42. Noreen, E. 1989. Computer Intensive Methods for Testing Hypotheses. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
43. Noreen, E., and J. Sepe. 1981. Market reactions to accounting policy deliberations: The inflation accounting case. The Accounting Review 56 (2): 253–269.
44. O’Brien, V. E., and R. W. Hodges. 1993. A study of class action securities fraud cases 1988–1993. Emeryville, CA: Law and Economics Consulting Group, Inc.
45. Painter, R. W. 1998. Sounding a false alarm: Federal preemption of state securities fraud causes of action. Cornell Law Review 84 (1): 1–108.
46. Ratner, D. 1998. Securities Regulation in a Nutshell. 6th edition. Saint Paul, MN: West Publishers.
47. Ryngaert, M., and J. Netter. 1988. Shareholder wealth effects of the Ohio anti-takeover law. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 4 (2): 373–383.
48. Schipper, K., and R. Thompson. 1983. The impact of merger-related regulation on the shareholders of acquiring firms. Journal of Accounting Research 21 (1): 184–221.
49. Schmitt, R. B. 1996. Laws intended to limit suits clog up courts. Wall Street Journal (January 24): B1.
50. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 1997a. Report to the President and the Congress on the first year of practice under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Office of the General Counsel. April. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
51. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 1997b. Brief of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Amicus Curiae: In Re Silicon Graphics Securities Litigation. November. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
52. Sefcik, S., and R. Thompson. 1986. An approach to statistical inference in cross-sectional models with security abnormal returns as dependent variable. Journal of Accounting Research 24 (2): 316–334.
53. Seligman, J. 1994a. The merits do matter. Harvard Law Review 108: 438–457.
54. Seligman, J. 1994b. The implications of Central Bank. The Business Lawyer 49 (August): 1429–1449.
55. Smith, A. 1981. The SEC ‘‘reversal’’ of FASB Statement No. 19: An investigation of information effects. Journal of Accounting Research 19 (Supplement): 174–211.
56. Spiess, K., and P. Tkac. 1997. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: The stock market casts its vote. Managerial and Decision Economics 18 (7-8): 545–561.
57. State News Briefs. 1996. Legal pot in California. (November 5).
58. Taylor, J. 1995. House votes to override veto of securities-suit bill. Wall Street Journal (December 21): A3.
59. U.S. Newswire. 1998. Clinton’s statement on Uniform Standards Act. (November 3).
60. Walsh, S. 1995. House overrides veto of securities bill: Senate may vote today on frivolous shareholder lawsuits. Washington Post (December 21): A20.
61. Washington Times. 1995. Editorial: Dining for dollars at the White House. (December 19): A20.
62. Weiss, E. J., and L. J. White. 1987. Of econometrics and indeterminacy: A study of investors’ reactions to ‘‘changes’’ in corporate law. California Law Review 75: 551–607.
63. Yoachum, S. 1996. Ad blitz boosts support for Prop. 209 in Field poll. San Francisco Chronicle (November 4): A1.