As reported here, Johnson & Johnson scored a major victory last week in a case challenging some of its discounting practices. The jury concluded that J&J had not engaged in monopolization of the market for “trocars,” which are sharp cylindrical devices used in endoscopic surgery. Plaintiff Applied Medical Resources Corp., which sells trocars that compete with J&J’s, had complained that J&J’s discounting practices excluded it from the trocars market. Specifically, Applied complained about J&J’s “bundled discounts,” which provided a discount on J&J’s sutures (surgical stitches) to those hospital purchasers that also bought a certain percentage of their trocars from J&J.

Read the full piece here. 

Congratulations to George Mason University Professor Kimberly Moore, who was confirmed by a vote of 92-0 today by the Senate and will soon take her place on the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Read the full piece here.

In a post titled, “Backdating: Yes, Virginia, Execs Do Want Inflated Pay?” over at PrawfsBlawg, Matt Bodie weighs in on the backdating “scandal”? As many of you know, the topic has been much-discussed of late here at TOTM and over at Larry Ribstein’s Ideoblog (who, it turns out, beat us to this punch), and you’re probably wondering when we’re ever going to stop. Well, we (Geoff and Josh) think Matt’s post is so misguided that it merits its own paragraph-by-paragraph rebuttal in this, TOTM’s first-ever co-authored blog post!

Read the full piece here.

Todd Henderson’s paper finds that compensation arrangements of solvent and insolvent firms are similar to each other. The empirical strategy involves the assumption that firms in bankruptcy are a useful control group for testing agency theory explanations of executive compensation because those costs are significantly lower for insolvent firms.

Read the full piece here.

Securities Mosaic is a fantastic resource for anyone working in the securities field. It provides comprehensive information in six key areas: disclosure, laws, rules, guidance, news, and compliance centers. In addition, the site features SM Blogwatch, which republishes posts from various securities-related blogs, including this one.

Read the full piece here.

Holman Jenkins reports that a group of economists led by Milton Friedman and Harry Markowitz are getting behind the idea of putting an end to the expensing of options. It is a great column. Jenkins goes on to discuss options backdating and makes the following points, which will sound unfamiliar to TOTM readers..

Read the full piece here. 

According to Bar None, an op-ed by Jack Turner in today’s NYT, “history shows that, however commendable the reasoning, efforts to control how people drink — or eat, or smoke — tend to backfire.” I’ve made a similar argument in discussing smoking bans.

Read the full piece here.

Abstract

This paper investigates a dataset that codes key features of the competition laws of 102 countries. It first compares the scope of the laws overall, and of various subcomponents such as the law governing dominance, collusive conduct, and mergers. The second question examined in this paper is whether competition law has any effect on the intensity of competition within a nation. We find, in ordinary least squares regressions, that the scope of a country’s competition law is positively associated with the perceived intensity of competition in the country’s economy. However, we find no evidence that the scope of competition law is positively associated with an objective proxy of the intensity of competition. Moreover, instrumental variables regressions, though preliminary, do not indicate that the scope of competition law affects the perceived intensity of competition.

This new chapter in the forthcoming Handbook of Law and Economics (Polinsky & Shavell, eds.) from Avery Katz, Benjamin Hermalin, and Richard Craswell looks like essential reading for anyone interested in economic analysis of contracts and contract law.

Read the full piece here.