Securities Law Commons^™

What Twenty-First-Century Free Speech Law Means For Securities Regulation, Helen Norton

Notre Dame Law Review

Securities law has long regulated securities-related speech—and until recently, it did so with little, if any, First Amendment controversy. Yet the antiregulatory turn in the Supreme Court’s twenty-first-century Free Speech Clause doctrine has inspired corporate speakers’ increasingly successful efforts to resist regulation in a variety of settings, settings that now include securities law. This doctrinal turn empowers courts, if they so choose, to dismantle the securities regulation framework in place since the Great Depression. At stake are not only recent governmental proposals to require companies to disclose accurate information about their vulnerabilities to climate change and other emerging risks, but …

Taking Stock Of Startup Stock Options: Addressing Disclosure And Liquidity Concerns Of Startup Employees, John R. Dorney

Vanderbilt Law Review

U.S. capital markets are becoming increasingly private. Initial public offerings have steadily declined since the 1990s, and private companies are remaining private over twice as long as they have in the past. Furthermore, private company financing has reached unprecedented levels. Private securities offerings now greatly outpace the value of publicly traded securities. Additionally, recent regulatory changes seem to be accelerating this shift from the public to the private markets. One result of this shift is that private company valuations have grown immensely, so much so that private companies with valuations of over $1 billion exist and are known as “unicorns.” …

Total Return Meltdown: The Case For Treating Total Return Swaps As Disguised Secured Transactions, Colin P. Marks

Pepperdine Law Review

Archegos Capital Management, at its height, had $35 billion in assets. But in the spring of 2021, in part through its use of total return swaps, Archegos sparked a $30 billion dollar sell-off that left many of the world’s largest banks footing the bill. Mitsubishi UFJ Group estimated a loss of $300 million; UBS, Switzerland’s biggest bank, lost $861 million; Morgan Stanley lost $911 million; Japan’s Nomura lost $2.85 billion; but the biggest hit came to Credit Suisse Group AG which lost $5.5 billion. Archegos, itself lost $20 billion over two days. The unique characteristics of total return swaps and …

Finding The Boundaries Of Equitable Disgorgement, Cameron K. Hood

Vanderbilt Law Review

The disgorgement of “ill-gotten gains” is a significant mechanism for enforcing the securities laws. By compelling a violator of the securities laws to forfeit their illegal proceeds, disgorgement serves as a strong deterrent for securities fraud and an important method by which investors are compensated for unjust losses in the market—and today accounts for the recovery of billions of dollars annually. Despite its importance, commentators in recent years began to call into question the
availability of the disgorgement remedy for the SEC. The SEC purses disgorgement under the agency’s grant for seeking equitable relief for the benefit of investors; however, …

High-End Bargaining Problems, William W. Clayton

Vanderbilt Law Review

Many important areas of the law place great confidence in the ability of contracting parties to bargain effectively. In this Article, I question the wisdom of a formalistic faith in bargaining by identifying flaws in the bargaining process at the high end of the market, where parties are sophisticated and have substantial resources to aid them in bargaining.

My analysis focuses on the private equity fund industry, which is widely regarded as one of the most elite contracting spaces in the market. Because of rigorous investor qualification laws and other distinctive features of private equity funds, this industry enjoys many …

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 …

Collaborative Approaches To Blockchain Regulation: The Brooklyn Project Example, Patrick Berarducci

Cleveland State Law Review

Today, I am going to discuss, at a high level, blockchain technology—what it is, what are its unique features that could revolutionize markets and economies, and how it could impact law and regulation. That is a lot to cover—far too much in the time allotted. So I will keep things at a very high level and hopefully pique some interest in everyone to dig deeper on their own.

Enforcing The Bargain V. Materiality Requirement: The Future Of Disclosure-Only Settlements Post-Trulia, Hao Jiang

Pace Law Review

In In re Trulia, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, the Delaware Court of Chancery broke away from its tradition of routinely approving disclosure-only settlements and required disclosures to be material in order to cure the conflict of interest between plaintiff’s counsel and the plaintiff class. I argue that fairness of settlement is the only standard in approving class action settlements and fairness will not be achieved by requiring materiality. Shareholders are legally entitled to all material information, as the board’s fiduciary duty dictates. Thus, material disclosures are enforcement of a legal duty that is no consideration for the release of shareholder claims. …

The Gatekeepers Of Crowdfunding, Andrew A. Schwartz

Washington and Lee Law Review

Securities crowdfunding is premised on two core policy goals: inclusivity and efficiency. First, crowdfunding is conceived as an inclusive system where all entrepreneurs are given a chance to pitch their idea to the “crowd.” Second, crowdfunding is supposed to be an efficient way to channel funds from public investors to promising startup companies. There is a fundamental tension between these two policy goals, however. A totally inclusive system would ensure that platforms list any and every company that wants to participate. But platforms need to curate and select the companies they list in order to establish a reputation as a …

Cash For Your Conscience: Do Whistleblower Incentives Improve Enforcement Of The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act?, Amy Deen Westbrook

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Legal Frankenstein’S Monster: The Complete Bar Order In Securities Fraud Class Action Lawsuits, Jonathan C. Stanley

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

When Is The ‘Force’ With A Securities Claim That Is ‘Brought To Enforce’ A Federal Securities Law?, Michelle Wellnitz

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

How Much Can It Be Bent Before Breaking? Changing The Foundations Of Arbitration In Securities Disputes, M. Saleh Jaberi, Bruno Zeller

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Following the emergence of arbitration in the stock market disputes, governments and brokers have tried to modify the arbitration procedure in order to adapt it to their needs. Consequently, the foundations of arbitration, such as freedom to enter into an arbitration agreement and selection of arbitrators, have changed in relation to rules and practice. Some of the securities arbitrations have judicialized and have lost the fundamental principles of arbitration, while others have changed only some of the traditional arbitration traits. It is important to protect the nature of arbitration; otherwise, the necessary support of courts for the arbitration procedure and …

Attorneys Beware: Increased Liability For Providing Advice To Corporate Clients Issuing Securites, Joseph Reece

Akron Law Review

Although the law in this area is rapidly evolving, a general overview of recent case law seems to indicate that attorneys may be liable even though their participation in the issuance of securities only involved rendering routine services to a corporate client. If an attorney were to have an active part in activities such as business planning or the promotion of securities, their exposure to potential liability would increase dramatically. As a result of this rapid change in the law, there is a degree of uncertainty concerning the potential liabilities attorneys may face when assisting their corporate clients in issuing …

The Ipo Crisis: Title I Of The Jobs Act And Why It Does Not Go Far Enough, Brian Howaniec

Pepperdine Law Review

This Comment explores the brewing controversy over Title I and assesses the actual impact that it is having (and will have) on investor protection and the IPO market. This Comment argues that Title I has the ability to affect both, but, due to factors outside of Congress's control, will likely have only a minimal effect on either. Part II discusses the objectives of investor protection legislation and how previous legislation regulated the financial markets. Part III explains how these regulations have been changed for emerging growth companies under Title I. Part IV examines what impact Title I will have on …

The Great And Powerful Faa: Why Schwab’S Class Action Waiver Should Have Been Enforced Over Finra’S Rules, Clint Hale

Pepperdine Law Review

This Comment argues that recent Supreme Court precedent, circuit court decisions in contexts similar to FINRA’s oversight of the securities industry, and investors’ true interests all instruct that Schwab’s class action waiver should have been enforced over FINRA’s contrary command. Part II discusses FINRA’s role in the securities industry, the FAA and recent Supreme Court precedent interpreting the FAA, and the FINRA Rules that Schwab’s class action and joinder waiver violated. Part III analyzes why the conflict between the FAA and FINRA’s rules should have been resolved in favor of the FAA and supports this argument with discussion of federal …

Fraud Is Already Illegal: Section 621 Of The Dodd-Frank Act In The Context Of The Securities Laws, Nathan R. Schuur

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In the aftermath of the financial crisis, lawmakers and the public focused on abuses in the securitization industry. Abacus, a Synthetic CDO created by Goldman Sachs & Co., became a symbol of what many felt was a corrupt system when it became known that Goldman and Fabrice Tourre, a Vice President at its Correlation Trading Desk, had assisted a hedge fund in designing the security to fail. Perceived failings of the securities laws to prevent transactions like Abacus spurred Congress to enact Section 621 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which prohibits conflicts of interest in asset-backed securitizations. But the law is …

Securities Laws As Foreign Policy, Karen E. Woody

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Unfinished Business: Dodd-Frank's Whistleblower Anti-Retaliation Protections Fall Short For Private Companies And Their Employees, Chelsea Hunt Overhuls

The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”) revolutionized the world of securities law whistleblowing. It encouraged employees to reveal corporate fraud by providing federal anti-retaliation protection to incentivize such reports. Securities law whistleblowing was transformed a second time in 2010 when Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”). Under Dodd-Frank, employees that report information to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) are not only provided federal anti-retaliation protections but also are eligible for a hefty bounty. Two major differences separate these statutes: (1) SOX is limited to employees of companies who are subject to the reporting …

Don't Throw The Baby Out With The Bath Water: The Merits Of The Intermediate Approach To The Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act, Selby P. Brown

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Inequities In Corporate And Securities Law: Disabling The Exploitative Chinese Corporation And Charting A Path To International Commercial Accountability, Jonathan P. Schmidt

San Diego International Law Journal

This article seeks to illuminate these issues and provide a roadmap for the U.S. federal and state legislatures to come together to protect the U.S. investor from the type of accounting fraud and stock misinformation that was the impetus behind enacting the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. First, this article will discuss the legal backdrop and legislative policy behind U.S. laws such as SOX and its enforcement mechanisms, and the ability for shareholders to bring securities class action derivative actions for financial fraud. This article will also discuss trade secrets laws, criminal extradition treaties, international enforcement of judgments, and elucidate the …

The Tips Are For The Taking: The Supreme Court Limits Third Party Liability In Dirks V. Securities And Exchange Commission, W. Steven Shayer

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Unjustified Furor Over Securities Arbitration, Gilbert R. Serota

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Social Network And The Crowdfund Act: Zuckerberg, Saverin, And Venture Capitalists' Dilution Of The Crowd, John S. (Jack) Wroldsen

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

By virtue of Title III of the JOBS Act, signed into law on April 5, 2012, crowdfunding could become a powerful, even revolutionary, force to finance start-up companies. It democratizes entrepreneurs' access to seed capital and converts the masses of Internet users into potential retail venture capitalists. Many have cautioned, though, that crowdfunding poses serious investment risks of start-up companies failing, committing fraud, and being mismanaged. Accordingly, the JOBS Act includes numerous disclosure obligations designed to mitigate such downside risks.

But what has been overlooked, and what this Article analyzes from a venture capitalist perspective, is that even if a …