ABSTRACT This paper hypothesizes and finds that firms audited by city‐industry specialists have more timely disclosures of contingent losses from litigation when there is no news coverage relating to the legal case prior to management disclosures. A closer examination reveals that this result is explained by the specialist auditors’ prior experience auditing clients in the same office and industry who are involved with litigation. In our setting, disclosures of litigation‐related contingent losses, we identify two kinds of knowledge generated from experience: industry knowledge and litigation knowledge. Industry knowledge helps auditors detect and correct poor implementation of guidance for litigation loss contingency disclosures. Auditors gain litigation knowledge from auditing clients in a given office and industry with previous involvement as defendants. Thus, the two types of knowledge interact in their effects on reporting outcomes.

ABSTRACT Following management theory on organizational legitimacy, we predict that managers mimic the accounting of industry-leading companies to gain legitimacy. Such demand for legitimacy is expected to be greater for new managers because stakeholders are more uncertain about the managers’ ability. Using a sample of CEO turnovers, we find that a firm increases financial statement comparability with industry leaders after the new CEO assumes office. This relation is stronger when (1) new managers lack executive experience at larger firms, are younger, or belong to an underrepresented group (i.e., are female or nonwhite); (2) networks that facilitate imitation are more intense, such as when firms and peers are located in the same metropolitan statistical area (MSA) and when they share auditors or blockholders; and (3) firms’ operating environments are more volatile. These findings support the idea that CEOs’ demand for legitimacy leads to more comparable accounting. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text.

ABSTRACT In the presence of litigation-facing suppliers, the supply chain relationship is at risk. Suppliers with principal customers (dependent suppliers) have a higher concentration of sales to customers, and they are more at risk relative to suppliers without principal customers (non-dependent suppliers). As a result, we predict and find that litigation disclosure patterns differ for the two supplier types: dependent suppliers are more likely to delay bad news and accelerate good news related to litigation outcomes, compared to non-dependent suppliers. Such strategic disclosure patterns in our end-game setting are opposite to those documented in the existing supply chain literature for the repeated-game setting (for example, Hui, Klasa, and Yeung 2012). JEL Classifications: M41; M48; K22.