Securities Law Commons^™

Regulation Of Securities Offerings In California: Is It Time For A Change After A Century Of Merit Regulation?, Neal H. Brockmeyer

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

The California securities law originated in 1913 from a populist movement that embodied a paternalistic attitude toward the protection of investors. It was characterized by the registration of offerings of securities with few exemptions and exclusions, a qualitative review of the merits of those offerings and an administrator with broad authority to implement and enforce the law. While the California securities law is still based on merit review, exclusions and exemptions have been added and expanded over the years by the California legislature and securities regulators. More recently, Congress has preempted state registration and merit review of various securities and …

Kill Cammer: Securities Litigation Without Junk Science, J. B. Heaton

William & Mary Business Law Review

Securities litigation is a hotbed of junk science concerning market efficiency. This Article explains why and suggests a way out. In its 1988 decision in Basic v. Levinson, the Supreme Court endorsed the fraud on the market presumption for securities traded in an efficient market. Faced with the task of determining market efficiency, courts throughout the nation embraced the ad hoc speculations of a first-mover district court that proclaimed, in Cammer v. Bloom, how to allege (and presumably prove) facts that would do just that. The Cammer court’s analysis did not rely on financial economics for its notions, but instead …

Newman/Martoma: The Insider Trading Law's Impasse And The Promise Of Congressional Action, Tai H. Park

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

The prohibition against insider trading is a judge-made law that has evolved for over fifty years, and has reached a critical impasse in two recent decisions in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals: United States v. Newman and United States v. Martoma. Judges of the Second Circuit are sharply divided over what conduct constitutes improper trading on material nonpublic information (“MNPI”), leaving the law in profound disarray. At bottom, the disagreement stems from a decades-old split within the judiciary about how to (1) ensure a fair securities marketplace, while (2) enabling institutional analysts to probe for corporate information in furtherance …

Are Securities Laws Effective Against Climate Change? A Proposal For Targeted Climate Related Disclosure And Ghg Reduction, Nate Chumley

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

The New York Attorney General filed a lawsuit against Exxon Mobil on October 24, 2018, claiming the company committed securities fraud in order to prop up the value of the company by publicly disclosing a higher proxy cost—or projected future cost—of climate change regulation than the internal cost used. Following this lawsuit, a federal class action was filed utilizing the same legal theory on the same facts. These lawsuits should be viewed as part of the larger history of lawsuits against large fossil fuel companies for climate change-related harms. Public nuisance theory largely captured a set of lawsuits against these …

Multilateral Transparency For Security Markets Through Dlt, David C. Donald, Mahdi H. Miraz

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

For decades, changing technology and policy choices have worked to fragment securities markets, rendering them so dark that neither ownership nor real-time price of securities are generally visible to all parties multilaterally. The policies in the U.S. National Market System and the EU Market in Financial Instruments Directive— together with universal adoption of the indirect holding system— have pushed Western securities markets into a corner from which escape to full transparency has seemed either impossible or prohibitively expensive. Although the reader has a right to skepticism given the exaggerated promises surrounding blockchain in recent years, we demonstrate in this paper …

Reconciling U.S. Banking And Securities Data Preservation Rules With European Mandatory Data Erasure Under Gdpr, Ronald V. Distante

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

United States law, which requires financial institutions to retain customer data, conflicts with European Union law, which requires financial institutions to delete customer data on demand. A financial institution operating transnationally cannot comply with both U.S. and EU law. Financial institutions thus face the issue that they cannot possibly delete and retain the same data simultaneously. This Note will clarify the scope and nature of this conflict.

First, it will clarify the conflict by examining (1) the relevant laws, which are Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act, and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulations, (2) …

Mandatory Disclosure In Primary Markets, Andrew A. Schwartz

Utah Law Review

Mandatory disclosure—the idea that companies must be legally required to disclose certain, specified information to public investors—is the first principle of modern securities law. Despite the high costs it imposes, mandatory disclosure has been well defended by legal scholars on two theoretical grounds: ‘Agency costs’ and ‘information underproduction.’ While these two concepts are a good fit for secondary markets (where investors trade securities with one another), this Article shows that they are largely irrelevant in the context of primary markets (where companies offer securities directly to investors). The surprising result is that primary offerings—such as an IPO—may not require mandatory …