z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Good Monitoring, Bad Monitoring*
Author(s) -
Yaniv Grinstein,
Stefano Rossi
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
european finance review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 4.933
H-Index - 61
eISSN - 1573-692X
pISSN - 1382-6662
DOI - 10.1093/rof/rfv051
Subject(s) - scrutiny , fiduciary , supreme court , business , value (mathematics) , event study , supreme court decisions , enterprise value , accounting , law , political science , history , context (archaeology) , duty , archaeology , machine learning , computer science
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, signaling 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.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom