This Article seeks to point out errors in a study published by Professor Janet C. Alexander in the Stanford Law Review in 1991. The study concluded that securities legislation reform was necessary based on the prevalence of meritless claims in the securities litigation area. This Article examines Professor Alexander's study and finds several methodological errors. It also repeats the study without the errors and explains the different conclusions. The authors also performed their own study with a broader sample than used in the prior study. The authors conclude that the scientific method suggests that Professor Alexander's conclusions are incorrect, and that merits do matter in settling securities litigation cases.
Leonard B. Simon & William S. Dato,
Legislating on a False Foundation: The Erroneous Academic Underpinnings of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995,
San Diego L. Rev.
Available at: https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol33/iss3/6