首页> 外文OA文献 >The Legal Status of “Dump u26 Sue”: Should Plaintiffs and their Attorneys be Prohibited from Trading the Stock of Companies they Sue? – a Law and Economics Approach
【2h】

The Legal Status of “Dump u26 Sue”: Should Plaintiffs and their Attorneys be Prohibited from Trading the Stock of Companies they Sue? – a Law and Economics Approach

机译:“转储起诉”的法律地位:是否应禁止原告及其律师买卖他们起诉的公司的股票? –法律和经济学方法

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

There is some evidence that plaintiffs and their attorneys are profitably short-selling the stock of the companies they intend to sue. The status of such short sales is undecided in the law. Lawsuits against companies can cause large drops in market value, and hence such an action by the plaintiff should cause concern. Plaintiffs, however, are not traditional insiders, and they do not owe the shareholders any fiduciary duties. They can therefore consent to their attorneys also short-selling the stock of the defendant corporation. The attorneys need to receive such permission to avoid misappropriating the information concerning their client’s decision to sue. A plaintiff’s decision to sue after short-selling does not constitute market manipulation in the traditional sense, since the decision to sue is a true fact that causes the drop in the share price as opposed to those who commit fraud by spreading false negative stories about the company. Plaintiffs need, therefore, to be legally deemed temporary insiders until they publicly reveal their intention to sue or actually sue. The reasons for deeming them insiders, and hence prohibiting them from short-selling, are threefold. First, allowing such activities would raise the same concerns regarding market integrity raised by those opposed to insider trading. Second, allowing such short-selling is a form of fraud by silence against those who purchase the shares. Third, allowing short-selling would give the plaintiffs double recovery for their lawsuit, as they could gain a large share of their claim against the company from the profitable short sales in addition to any verdict or settlement. Furthermore, proposals to extend Regulation FD to plaintiff’s attorneys would be ineffective in combating the harm from such short-selling. The law, therefore, through either developments by the courts, regulatory promulgations by the SEC, an act of Congress, or a combination of any of the preceding three mechanisms should be used to treat plaintiffs as insiders until they sue or announce their intention to sue.
机译:有证据表明,原告及其律师正在卖空他们打算起诉的公司的股票。这种卖空的状态在法律上是不确定的。针对公司的诉讼可能会导致市场价值大幅下降,因此,原告的这一举动应引起关注。但是,原告不是传​​统的内部人,他们也不欠股东任何信托责任。因此,他们可以同意其律师也卖空被告公司的股票。律师需要获得此类许可,以避免滥用有关其委托人决定起诉的信息。在传统意义上,原告决定在卖空后提起诉讼并不构成市场操纵,因为提起诉讼的事实是导致股价下跌的真实事实,而不是那些通过散布虚假的负面消息进行欺诈的人公司。因此,原告需要合法地视为临时内部知情人,直到他们公开表明其提起诉讼或实际起诉的意图为止。认为他们是内部人,从而禁止他们卖空的原因有三点。首先,允许进行此类活动将引起那些反对内幕交易的人对市场完整性的担忧。其次,允许这种卖空行为是对购买股票的人默默作弊的一种形式。第三,允许卖空将使原告获得双倍的诉讼赔偿,因为除了任何判决或和解外,他们还可以从有利可图的卖空中获得对公司的大部分索赔要求。此外,将FD规则扩展至原告律师的建议在对抗此类卖空行为造成的损害方面将是无效的。因此,通过法院的发展,美国证券交易委员会(SEC)的法规颁布,国会法案或上述三种机制中的任何一种的组合,都应使用该法律将原告视为内部人,直到他们起诉或宣布其起诉的意图为止。 。

著录项

  • 作者

    Yahya Moin A;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2005
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号