分解类

Benjamin Edwards
{"title":"分解类","authors":"Benjamin Edwards","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2476499","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Federal efforts to reform federal securities class actions now reverberate in state courts and in individual actions. This article explores emerging consequences driven by national litigation trends and the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA). I argue that a new dynamic, class disaggregation, has begun to occur. Individual investors may be following institutional investors into state courts in search of better litigation outcomes. Given these developments, I argue that Congress should consider further reforms to level the field and ensure that private parties resolve disputes involving national market securities under consistent standards.","PeriodicalId":289542,"journal":{"name":"CGN: Securities Litigation (Sub-Topic)","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disaggregated Classes\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Edwards\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2476499\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Federal efforts to reform federal securities class actions now reverberate in state courts and in individual actions. This article explores emerging consequences driven by national litigation trends and the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA). I argue that a new dynamic, class disaggregation, has begun to occur. Individual investors may be following institutional investors into state courts in search of better litigation outcomes. Given these developments, I argue that Congress should consider further reforms to level the field and ensure that private parties resolve disputes involving national market securities under consistent standards.\",\"PeriodicalId\":289542,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CGN: Securities Litigation (Sub-Topic)\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CGN: Securities Litigation (Sub-Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2476499\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CGN: Securities Litigation (Sub-Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2476499","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

联邦政府改革联邦证券集体诉讼的努力现在在州法院和个人诉讼中产生了反响。本文探讨了由国家诉讼趋势和证券诉讼统一标准法案(SLUSA)驱动的新结果。我认为,一种新的动态——阶级分化——已经开始出现。个人投资者可能会跟随机构投资者到州法院寻求更好的诉讼结果。鉴于这些事态发展,我认为国会应考虑进一步改革,以创造公平的环境,并确保私人各方在一致的标准下解决涉及国家市场证券的纠纷。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Disaggregated Classes
Federal efforts to reform federal securities class actions now reverberate in state courts and in individual actions. This article explores emerging consequences driven by national litigation trends and the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA). I argue that a new dynamic, class disaggregation, has begun to occur. Individual investors may be following institutional investors into state courts in search of better litigation outcomes. Given these developments, I argue that Congress should consider further reforms to level the field and ensure that private parties resolve disputes involving national market securities under consistent standards.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信