Securities Law Commons^™

Broader Is Better: How Courts Should Determine Whether Or Not An Allegation Of Fraud Falls Under The Preemption Provision Of The Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act, Jennifer Rose Roeske

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Note argues that the correct approach for interpreting the scope of SLUSA's preemption language is the "literalist" approach taken by the Sixth Circuit. Part I of this Note lays out the legal framework of the Reform Act of 1995, Congress's intent in enacting the legislation, and the unintended consequences that flowed from the PSLRA's heightened pleading requirements. Part I also discusses SLUSA, what led to its passage, and its preemption language. Additionally, it looks at the Supreme Court's interpretation of preemption statutes generally, as well as the Supreme Court's broad interpretation of SLUSA in Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner …

Sub-Adviser Fee Litigation: Will Section 36(B) Acquire Teeth?, Francis J. Facciolo, Leland S. Solon

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Section 36(b) of the Investment Company Act establishes a private breach of fiduciary duty cause of action for shareholders in an investment company, or mutual fund, to challenge the fees charged by the mutual fund’s investment adviser, in recognition of the fact that the adviser or one of its affiliates customarily creates the mutual fund and has a great deal of influence over the composition of the mutual fund’s board of directors or trustees, which negotiates the fees paid to the investment adviser. Under the Gartenberg standard, which was substantially adopted by the Supreme Court in Jones v. Harris …

Is The Price Right? An Empirical Study Of Fee-Setting In Securities Class Actions, Michael A. Perino, Lynn A. Baker, Charles Silver

Faculty Publications

Every year, fee awards enable millions of people to obtain access to justice and strengthen the deterrent effect of the law by motivating lawyers to handle class actions. But little research exists on why judges award the amounts they do or whether they size fee awards correctly. The process remains a black box. Through a detailed study of 431 securities class actions that settled in federal district courts from 2007 through 2012, this Article presents the first empirical study to peer inside that black box. In contrast to prior analyses, this study relies on the actual court filings in each …

Major Investor Losses Due To Conflicted Advice: Brokerage Industry Advertising Creates The Illusion Of A Fiduciary Duty, Joseph C. Peiffer, Christine Lazaro

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

No national standard exists today requiring brokerage firms to put their clients’ interests first by avoiding making profits from conflicted advice. In the five years since the passage of the Dodd Frank Act, inaction by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on a fiduciary standard has cost American investors nearly $80 billion, based on estimated losses of $17 billion per year.

Amid encouraging recent signs of possible action from the Department of Labor and the SEC, there is a compelling case to be made for a ban on conflicted advice in order to protect investors. In the absence of …

Suitability Obligations Applicable To Securities And Annuities, Christine Lazaro, Benjamin P. Edwards

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Brokers are subject to different regulatory obligations depending on the type of product being recommended to a customer. Generally, brokers are subjected to overlapping oversight and are regulated at both the federal and state level. This oversight becomes even further complicated when a broker sells a product that spans multiple regulatory schemes such as certain annuities, which may be both insurance and securities products.

This article describes a broker’s suitability obligations under the new suitability rule when making recommendations which are covered by that rule. Next, it describes the additional obligations that a broker has when making a recommendation …