证券诉讼的利弊与企业声誉

IF 3.2 3区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE Contemporary Accounting Research Pub Date : 2023-09-20 DOI:10.1111/1911-3846.12907
Dain C. Donelson, Antonis Kartapanis, Christopher G. Yust
{"title":"证券诉讼的利弊与企业声誉","authors":"Dain C. Donelson,&nbsp;Antonis Kartapanis,&nbsp;Christopher G. Yust","doi":"10.1111/1911-3846.12907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We explore how securities litigation affects corporate reputation. Experts remain concerned that nonmeritorious securities class actions—those that will be dismissed or settled for nuisance amounts—cause reputational damage. Although several prior studies show reputational costs for nonmeritorious cases, they generally use indirect measures based on returns or total market losses, which are mechanically associated with securities litigation elements. In contrast, we use a relatively direct reputation measure from <i>Fortune</i>'s “Most Admired Companies” list. We find significant reputational damage after meritorious litigation, with the strongest cases having the largest effects. However, we find no evidence of reputational damage after nonmeritorious litigation. We also find that <i>Fortune</i>'s reputational damage measure is associated with more negative returns around the litigation filing date. We show possible mechanisms for our results, as initial legal filings contain information allowing market participants to assess case merits. Our results imply that reputational damage is primarily due to fraud, which securities litigation helps reveal to the market, rather than litigation itself. Thus, reputational damage is not an issue in over 70% of securities class actions due to the high frequency of nonmeritorious cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":10595,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Accounting Research","volume":"41 1","pages":"424-458"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1911-3846.12907","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The merits of securities litigation and corporate reputation\",\"authors\":\"Dain C. Donelson,&nbsp;Antonis Kartapanis,&nbsp;Christopher G. Yust\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1911-3846.12907\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>We explore how securities litigation affects corporate reputation. Experts remain concerned that nonmeritorious securities class actions—those that will be dismissed or settled for nuisance amounts—cause reputational damage. Although several prior studies show reputational costs for nonmeritorious cases, they generally use indirect measures based on returns or total market losses, which are mechanically associated with securities litigation elements. In contrast, we use a relatively direct reputation measure from <i>Fortune</i>'s “Most Admired Companies” list. We find significant reputational damage after meritorious litigation, with the strongest cases having the largest effects. However, we find no evidence of reputational damage after nonmeritorious litigation. We also find that <i>Fortune</i>'s reputational damage measure is associated with more negative returns around the litigation filing date. We show possible mechanisms for our results, as initial legal filings contain information allowing market participants to assess case merits. Our results imply that reputational damage is primarily due to fraud, which securities litigation helps reveal to the market, rather than litigation itself. Thus, reputational damage is not an issue in over 70% of securities class actions due to the high frequency of nonmeritorious cases.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10595,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contemporary Accounting Research\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"424-458\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1911-3846.12907\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contemporary Accounting Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1911-3846.12907\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Accounting Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1911-3846.12907","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们探讨证券诉讼如何影响企业声誉。专家们仍然担心,非恶意证券集体诉讼--那些将被驳回或以微不足道的金额和解的诉讼--会造成声誉损失。尽管之前的一些研究显示了非恶意案件的声誉成本,但这些研究通常使用基于收益或市场总损失的间接衡量标准,而这些标准与证券诉讼要素机械地联系在一起。相比之下,我们使用《财富》杂志 "最受赞赏公司 "榜单中相对直接的声誉衡量标准。我们发现,在有理诉讼之后,声誉会受到重大损害,最强有力的案件影响最大。然而,我们没有发现证据表明非善意诉讼会造成声誉损害。我们还发现,《财富》杂志的声誉损害衡量标准与诉讼申请日前后更多的负收益相关。我们为我们的结果展示了可能的机制,因为最初的法律文件包含了允许市场参与者评估案件是非曲直的信息。我们的结果表明,声誉受损主要是由于欺诈,而证券诉讼有助于向市场揭示欺诈,而不是诉讼本身。因此,在超过 70% 的证券集体诉讼中,声誉损害并不是一个问题,原因是非胜诉案件的发生率很高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The merits of securities litigation and corporate reputation

We explore how securities litigation affects corporate reputation. Experts remain concerned that nonmeritorious securities class actions—those that will be dismissed or settled for nuisance amounts—cause reputational damage. Although several prior studies show reputational costs for nonmeritorious cases, they generally use indirect measures based on returns or total market losses, which are mechanically associated with securities litigation elements. In contrast, we use a relatively direct reputation measure from Fortune's “Most Admired Companies” list. We find significant reputational damage after meritorious litigation, with the strongest cases having the largest effects. However, we find no evidence of reputational damage after nonmeritorious litigation. We also find that Fortune's reputational damage measure is associated with more negative returns around the litigation filing date. We show possible mechanisms for our results, as initial legal filings contain information allowing market participants to assess case merits. Our results imply that reputational damage is primarily due to fraud, which securities litigation helps reveal to the market, rather than litigation itself. Thus, reputational damage is not an issue in over 70% of securities class actions due to the high frequency of nonmeritorious cases.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
11.10%
发文量
97
期刊介绍: Contemporary Accounting Research (CAR) is the premiere research journal of the Canadian Academic Accounting Association, which publishes leading- edge research that contributes to our understanding of all aspects of accounting"s role within organizations, markets or society. Canadian based, increasingly global in scope, CAR seeks to reflect the geographical and intellectual diversity in accounting research. To accomplish this, CAR will continue to publish in its traditional areas of excellence, while seeking to more fully represent other research streams in its pages, so as to continue and expand its tradition of excellence.
期刊最新文献
Performance effects of insulating and non-insulating cost allocations in stable and unstable production environments Leader versus lagger: How the timing of financial reports affects audit quality and investment efficiency Bank audit committee financial expertise and timely loan loss recognition CAR 2024 Reviewer Recognition Program / Programme de reconnaissance des réviseurs 2024 de RCC Control issues: How providing input affects auditors' reliance on artificial intelligence
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1