Securities Law Commons^™

The Sec And The Extent Of Its Power To Sanction: An Analysis Of Teicher V. Securities And Exchange Commission - Did The Court Correctly Apply Chevron V. Natural Resources Defense Council To A Matter Of Agency Interpretation?, Rose Arce

Golden Gate University Law Review

This note will address two primary issues in analyzing Teicher. The first is whether the SEC has the authority within its sanctioning power, specifically under Section 15(b)(6) of the Exchange Act, to impose collateral limitations on a person who violates the Exchange Act, such as preventing that person from utilizing his or her license in another branch of the securities industry. The second is whether the SEC has the authority within its sanctioning power, specifically under Section 203(f) of the Advisers Act, to bar a person who violates the Adviser's Act from associating or seeking to become associated with an …

Private Securities Litigation Reform Act Of 1995: Do Issuers Still Get Soaked In The Safe Harbor?, Noelle Matteson

Golden Gate University Law Review

This Comment will examine the background and development of protection for forward-looking statements through the SEC, the courts and Congress. Following this background examination, Part III will focus on the recently passed Reform Act. This discussion will consider the arguments made by opponents and proponents of the Reform Act, the effects of this act and whether it is encouraging disclosure by issuers and protecting the same issuers from frivolous lawsuits.

Securities Law - Mccormick V. Fund American Companies: Altering The Total Mix Of Information Made Available During Disclosure In Corporate Repurchases Of Stock, David E. Wanis

Golden Gate University Law Review

In McCormick v. Fund American Companies, the Ninth Circuit granted summary judgment to defendant corporation over plaintiff shareholder's claim that defendant had violated the Securities Exchange Act by misrepresenting or omitting material information during negotiations to repurchase stock from plaintiff. The court found that in light of plaintiff's status as a "sophisticated business executive," defendant's alleged misrepresentations and omissions did not "significantly alter the total mix of information made available" concerning the contemplated sale of a subsidiary company of defendant corporation.

Leveraged Etfs: The Trojan Horse Has Passed The Margin-Rule Gates, William M. Humphries

Seattle University Law Review

What do the Great Depression, the Great Recession, and the demise of Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterns all have in common? One word: leverage. The misuse of leverage, in all its forms, contributed greatly to all of these events. Yet even today, common investors can purchase a leveraged exchange-traded fund (leveraged ETF), a complex product that uses leverage to increase returns, without triggering applicable laws designed to regulate the use of leverage. This Comment articulates the basics surrounding the functions and operations of leveraged ETFs and margin rules in order to assess the compatibility of the two. The Comment argues …

The Role Of Derivatives In The Financial Crisis – Testimony Before The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, June 30, 2010, Michael Greenberger

Michael Greenberger

It is now almost universally accepted that the unregulated multi-trillion dollar OTC CDS market helped foment a mortgage crisis, then a credit crisis, and finally a ―once-in-a-century systemic financial crisis that, but for huge U.S. taxpayer interventions, would have in the fall of 2008 led the world economy into a devastating Depression. Before explaining below the manner in which credit default swaps fomented this crisis, it worth citing in the margin those many economists, regulators, market observers, and financial columnists who have described the central role unregulated CDS played in the crisis. Even those once skeptical of arguments about the …

The Role Of Derivatives In The Financial Crisis – Testimony Before The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, June 30, 2010, Michael Greenberger

Congressional Testimony

It is now almost universally accepted that the unregulated multi-trillion dollar OTC CDS market helped foment a mortgage crisis, then a credit crisis, and finally a ―once-in-a-century systemic financial crisis that, but for huge U.S. taxpayer interventions, would have in the fall of 2008 led the world economy into a devastating Depression. Before explaining below the manner in which credit default swaps fomented this crisis, it worth citing in the margin those many economists, regulators, market observers, and financial columnists who have described the central role unregulated CDS played in the crisis.

Even those once skeptical of arguments about the …

Cleaning The Murky Safe Harbor For Forward-Looking Statements: An Inquiry Into Whether Actual Knowledge Of Falsity Precludes The Meaningful Cautionary Statement Defense, Allan Horwich

Faculty Working Papers

Congress included a safe harbor for forward-looking statements in the 1995 Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. This affords certain issuers and other specified persons limited protection from civil liability for damages under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 when the projections or objectives in a forward-looking statement are not realized, i.e., turn out to be false. The safe harbor contains two principal elements, in addition to protection for "immaterial" statements: one prong where projections are accompanied by "meaningful cautionary statements," the second prong where the plaintiff fails to prove that the speaker made the …

"Controlling" Securities Fraud: Proposed Liability Standards For Controlling Persons Under The 1933 And 1934 Securities Acts, Nancy Staudt

Faculty Working Papers

This Student Note investigates the history and intent underlying the controlling person liability provisions of the 1933 and 1934 Securities Act. It notes that courts have adopted a ranges of standards for holding controlling persons liability, but whichever standard is chosen--that standard is applied to both Acts. This note argues that courts should impose unique liability standards for each statute in order to fully realize Congress' purpose in adopting the laws.