Presence Of Litigation Research Articles

The Shareholder Wealth Effects of Delaware Litigation

We collect data on the record of every action in over one thousand cases involving public companies from 2004 to 2011 in the Delaware Court of Chancery, which is the leading court for corporate law disputes in the United States. We use these data to estimate how markets respond to Delaware litigation events and characteristics such as case initiations, procedural motions, case quality, and judge identity. We find that negative abnormal returns are associated with the filing of derivative and contract cases, but we observe little effect associated with the filing of the average merger challenge. When we include measures of case quality, we see that higher quality cases increase the expected impact of derivative and contract litigation on firm value. We also develop evidence that tactics associated with multijurisdictional litigation are associated with a weakened impact of litigation on firm value. This evidence is consistent with the belief that the presence of litigation in another jurisdiction allows defense lawyers to bid down competing groups of plaintiffs’ lawyers during settlement negotiations. Finally, we show that abnormal returns are not associated with information on judicial assignment at the time of case filing, nor are they associated with judge identity at case resolution. These results suggest that the judicial impact on shareholder wealth at the time of judicial assignment and the time of case termination is too small to be statistically detected.

MR imaging findings in mild traumatic brain injury with persistent neurological impairment

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a widespread cause of neurologic disability, with >70% of cases being mild in severity. Magnetic resonance imaging provides objective biomarkers in the diagnosis of brain injury by detecting brain lesions resulting from trauma. This paper reports on the detection rates of presumed trauma-related pathology using fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) and susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) in TBI patients with chronic, persistent symptoms. Methods: 180 subjects with persistent neurobehavioral symptoms following head trauma referred by personal injury attorneys and 94 asymptomatic, age-matched volunteers were included in the study. 83% of TBI subjects were classified as mild. Results: TBI subjects had a significantly greater number of lesions detected by FLAIR than controls (42% vs. 22%) and more lesions detected by SWI than controls (28% vs. 3%). To reduce the confounding effects of aging, we examined mild TBI subjects <45years of age, which reduced the rate of lesions detected by FLAIR (26% vs. 2%) and SWI (15% vs. 0%). This younger group, which contained few age-related lesions, also demonstrated that subcortical lesions on FLAIR are more specific for TBI than deeper lesions. Conclusions: While the presence of litigation in mild TBI cases with incomplete recovery has been associated with greater expression of symptomatology and, by extension, poorer outcomes, this study shows that mild TBI patients in litigation with chronic, persistent symptoms may have associated brain injury underlying their symptoms detectable by MRI biomarkers.

Patent litigation and cross licensing with cumulative innovation

We investigate the firms’ investment decisions in the presence of litigation over infringement and cross licensing as a way to settle. The model endogenously determines not only the timing of investments but also their capacities, the degree of overlap between the initial and the subsequent innovations, and the way the competitors resolve the dispute. It shows that the firms’ R&D competition in the burgeoning market is more likely to entail a lawsuit and distinctly differentiated products, while they easily agree on cross licensing to utilize each other’s works in the slow-growing market, leaving little difference between the products. From the perspective of public policy, it is clarified that the policy on patent scope cannot yield the first-best result in terms of the speed of innovation, and the welfare analysis shows that social welfare is higher when the conflict is settled via cross licensing. However, the weak protection on patent rights, which is shown to encourage cross licensing, does not always guarantee the highest level of social welfare since it weakens the leader’s bargaining power in the negotiation, leading to fewer advanced products with higher prices.

Patent Litigation and Cross Licensing with Cumulative Innovation

We investigate the firms' investment decisions in the presence of litigation over infringement and cross licensing as a way to settle. The model endogenously determines not only the timing of investments but also their capacities, the degree of overlap between the initial and the subsequent innovations, and the way the competitors resolve the dispute. It shows that the firms' R&D competition in the burgeoning market is more likely to entail a lawsuit and distinctly differentiated products, while they easily agree on cross licensing to utilize each other's works in the slow-growing market, leaving little difference between the products. From the perspective of public policy, it is clarified that the policy on patent scope cannot yield the first-best result in terms of the speed of innovation, and the welfare analysis shows that social welfare is higher when the conflict is settled via cross licensing. However, the weak protection on patent rights, which is shown to encourage cross licensing, does not always guarantee the highest level of social welfare since it weakens the leader's bargaining power in the negotiation, leading to fewer advanced products with higher prices.

Abstract 2: Efficacy of epidural steroid injections

Objectives: To test the efficacy of epidural steroid injections (ESIs) for the relief of radicular-, facet joint-, and lumbar stenosis-related pain 3 months postinjections and to demonstrate whether the presence of litigation and smoking influenced the response to treatment. Design: Prospective survey. Setting: Community-based hospital. Participants: 300 patients who received steroid injections for radicular-, facet joint-, and lumbar stenosis-related pain. Interventions: All participants had clinical and diagnostic evidence of lumbar radiculopathy, spinal stenosis, or facet pain. Each was then treated with a series of ESIs. Each patient filled out a preinjection survey to determine the duration and distribution of their pain. A 10-point analog pain scale determined their pre-injection pain. Factors also evaluated were the etiology of pain, the presence of a lawsuit, and if the patient was a habitual smoker. At 3 months postinjection, each participant received a survey to rate their current pain and declare other interventions such as physical therapy and surgery. Main Outcome Measures: Percentage of participants who received pain relief from their ESIs and specifically which etiology of back pain showed a better response. Results: 3 months after ESIs, approximately 80% of patients had a decrease in their symptoms by 2 or more points on the 10-point analog pain scale. Patients who experienced the most pain relief were those with radicular or stenotic symptoms, nonsmoking, or without concomitant litigation. Conclusion: Steroid injections for back pain of radicular or stenotic nature (not facet), especially for nonsmokers or those without litigation, are an effective means of treating low back pain (LBP) in the first 3 months. This study will be followed by a 6 month and 12 month survey to determine the long-term efficacy of steroid injections for LBP.

Neuropsychological False Positives in Litigation: Trail Making Test Findings

100 workers' compensation claimants with no known history of brain injury and no claim for neuropsychological impairment were administered a generally accepted neuropsychological screening instrument, the Trail Making Test, to consider the possibility that the presence of litigation may be reflected in neuropsychological test scores. On Trails A and B, respectively, 40% and 36% of subjects scored in the impaired range. Clinicians are urged to interpret the results of the Trail Making Test cautiously when a patient is in litigation. Suggestions for research are offered.

NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL FALSE POSITIVES IN LITIGATION: TRAIL MAKING TEST FINDINGS

100 workers' compensation claimants with no known history of brain injury and no claim for neuropsychological impairment were administered a generally accepted neuropsychological screening instrument, the Trail Making Test, to consider the possibility that the presence of litigation may be reflected in neuropsychological test scores. On Trails A and B, respectively, 40% and 36% of subjects scored in the impaired range. Clinicians are urged to interpret the results of the Trail Making Test cautiously when a patient is in litigation. Suggestions for research are offered.