Logo image
Investor Justice
Journal article

Investor Justice

Nicole Iannarone
Minnesota law review, v 109(3), pp 1153-1228
01 Jan 2025
url
https://doi.org/10.24926/265535.4236View
Published, Version of Record (VoR) Restricted Open Access (License Unspecified)

Abstract

Government & Law Law Social Sciences
There is a systemic flaw in the investor protection landscape. Unrepresented investors face off against well-resourced repeatplayer firms that almost always have lawyers. While consumers face similar challenges in civil courts, in forced securities arbitration, the decisionmaker may not have a law degree, is prohibited from conducting any outside legal research, and has no monetary incentive to read materials the parties submit. These realities amplify already-existing informational and resource asymmetries between Main Street investors and stockbrokers and undermine the market-legitimizing function of securities arbitration. Despite being designed to permit investors to recoup losses without the aid of an attorney, the mandatory securities arbitration system has evolved into a process that investors cannot navigate on their own. This Article explores the unintended consequences of procedural changes designed to improve and professionalize the mandatory securities arbitration forum. In addition to shedding light on structural norms that disproportionately impact average investors, this Article proposes interventions to ameliorate those burdens. In so doing, it contributes to ongoing discourse concerning investor protection, procedural justice in forced arbitration, and access to justice for regular people.

Metrics

6 Record Views

Details

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

Source: SDGs in the Output

InCites Highlights

Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:

Web of Science research areas
Law
Logo image