Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Applicability Of Section 2462'S Statute Of Limitations To Sec Enforcement Suits In Light Of The Remedies Act Of 1990, Catherine E. Maxson
The Applicability Of Section 2462'S Statute Of Limitations To Sec Enforcement Suits In Light Of The Remedies Act Of 1990, Catherine E. Maxson
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that section 2462's limitations period reaches all SEC civil suits for monetary fines but not those SEC actions seeking equitable relief. Part I interprets section 2462 and, in the process, demonstrates that the statute controls SEC enforcement suits for civil penalties. Part II argues that SEC actions requesting injunctions or disgorgement of profits, unlike those seeking monetary fines, are not subject to the time bar. Finally, Part III asserts that SEC administrative enforcement proceedings should not be immune from the statute of limitations found in section 2462 of title 28 because exempting administrative proceedings would be tantamount …
Decreasing The Costs Of Jurisdictional Gridlock: Merger Of The Securities And Exchange Commission And The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Mark Frederick Hoffman
Decreasing The Costs Of Jurisdictional Gridlock: Merger Of The Securities And Exchange Commission And The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Mark Frederick Hoffman
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Jurisdictional conflict exists between the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), primarily due to the language of the 1974 CFTC Act. This Act grants the CFTC exclusive jurisdiction to regulate certain financial instruments which, given the increasing complexity and "hybrid" nature of such instruments, might simultaneously be subject to SEC regulation. This Note first explores the history of the two agencies and the statutory language giving rise to the jurisdictional conflict. This Note then examines several instances of jurisdictional conflict that resulted in extensive costs for the respective agencies and the United States' financial …
The Obsolescence Of Wall Street: A Contextual Approach To The Evolving Structure Of Federal Securities Regulation, Joel Seligman
The Obsolescence Of Wall Street: A Contextual Approach To The Evolving Structure Of Federal Securities Regulation, Joel Seligman
Michigan Law Review
As a matter of analytical style, this article illustrates a contextualist approach. For a considerable period of time, the dominant analytical style in corporate and securities .law has been a variant of economic, or law and economics, analysis. The virtue of this type of analysis is that it focuses on what its authors deem to be crucial variables and reaches conclusions derived from the core of a specific legal problem. The defect of this type of analysis is that so much is assumed or often assumed away.
Resales Of Securities Under The Securities Act Of 1933, Rutheford B. Campbell Jr.
Resales Of Securities Under The Securities Act Of 1933, Rutheford B. Campbell Jr.
Law Faculty Scholarly Articles
This Article explains the failings of the Securities and Exchange Commission in dealing with resales of securities and suggests an appropriate statutory and policy framework for a principled approach to the matter. Part I of this article is an introduction to this issue. Part II of this Article describes the present situation regarding the law of resales. Part III of this Article offers a series of broad observations about resales under the 1933 Act, suggests an economic analysis for the registration provisions of the 1933 Act, and presents some more specific recommendations concerning resale rules.
Private Plaintiffs May Not Maintain Aiding And Abetting Suits Under Securities Exchange Act Section 10(B) And Securities And Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5., Ginger E. Margolin
Private Plaintiffs May Not Maintain Aiding And Abetting Suits Under Securities Exchange Act Section 10(B) And Securities And Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5., Ginger E. Margolin
St. Mary's Law Journal
In Central Bank v. First Interstate Bank, the United States Supreme Court held that private plaintiffs may not maintain aiding and abetting suits under Securities Exchange Act Section 10(b) and Security and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5. The Court views Section 10(b) of the 1934 Act as a “catchall antifraud provision” that makes the use of “any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance” in contravention of the provision a violation of Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rules if such acts occur during the purchase or sale of securities. Rule 10b-5 is substantially the same as Section 10(b). However, neither Section 10(b) …