Are courts effective monitors of corporate decisions? In a controversial landmark case,
the Delaware Supreme Court held directors personally liable for breaching their fiduciary
duties, signalling a sharp increase in Delaware?s scrutiny over corporate decisions. In our
event study, low-growth Delaware firms outperformed matched non-Delaware firms by 1% in the three day event window.
In contrast, high-growth Delaware firms under-performed by 1%. Contrary to previous literature, we conclude that court decisions can have large, significant and heterogeneous effects on firm value, and that rules insulating directors from court scrutiny benefit the fastest growing sectors of the economy.
Derivatives are the ‘bad boys’ of modern finance: exciting, dangerous, and fundamentally misunderstood. These misunderstandings stem from the failure of scholars and policymakers to fully appreciate the unique legal and economic structure of...Read more
This Article shows that a variety of fundamental rules of corporate law are based on a set of myths. The Article explains that these myths play an important role in attracting public acceptance and support for what otherwise would be unpopular...Read more
The moral hazard incentives of the bank safety net predict that distressed banks take on more risk and higher leverage. Since many factors reduce these incentives, including charter value, regulation, and managerial incentives, the net economic...Read more
Compliance can and often does serve as a conduit through which regulators and enforcement authorities enlarge their authority beyond statutory bounds. The potential to do so is a function of the symbiotic relationship between compliance officers...Read more