Abstract
Part I discusses the current landscape of securities class action litigation. It explains how and why the suits are initiated and dis cusses the outcome of Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc. (HalliburtonII).19 PartII discusses the framework for the proposition of this comment. It provides a brief history of significant cas es and incorporates several recent cases that have opened the door to the possibility of implementing fee-shifting clauses. It concludes with a comparison to other contractual provisions cur rently being implemented by corporations and also analyzes fee shifting provisions under federal preemption. Part III explains why implementing fee-shifting provisions solves many of the key concerns raised by Halliburton II. Part IV discusses several im plications and possible future actions that are readily recogniza ble regarding fee-shifting provisions.
Recommended Citation
Steven W. Lippman,
A Corporation's Securities Litigation Gambit: Fee-Shifting Provisions That Defend Against Fraud-On-The-Market,
49
U. Rich. L. Rev.
1321
(2015).
Available at:
https://scholarship.richmond.edu/lawreview/vol49/iss4/12