z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Why Whistleblowers Lose: An Empirical and Qualitative Analysis of State Court Cases
Author(s) -
Nancy M. Modesitt
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
ssrn electronic journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1556-5068
DOI - 10.2139/ssrn.2499630
Subject(s) - law , state (computer science) , political science , qualitative analysis , law and economics , qualitative research , economics , sociology , computer science , algorithm , social science
This Article was originally intended to be an analysis of the propriety, or impropriety, of the doctrines most commonly used by courts to decide employees’ whistleblowing retaliation claims against employers. However, upon conducting initial research, it quickly became apparent that there was very little data available on whistleblowing cases. Unlike employment discrimination cases, where several empirical studies have been conducted, there is only one empirical analysis of whistleblower claims, which focused solely on outcomes in the federal administrative process for claims brought under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX). That study revealed that whistleblowers fare poorly for a number of reasons, but many of the reasons suggested by the author appear to be unique to SOX plaintiffs. This Article studies the success rates of whistleblowers suing under state law, as different a context as possible from SOX, and identifies common reasons whistleblower claims fail in these cases.

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