Law Commons^™

Regulatory Conflicts: International Tender And Exchange Offers In The 1990s, John C. Maguire

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Basel Iii And Credit Risk Measurement: Variations Among G20 Countries, Matt Schlickenmaier

San Diego International Law Journal

Most countries require banks to hold extra capital to protect against unforeseen financial calamities; banks with riskier loans must hold more capital than those with safer loans. Basel II, a set of international banking standards, allows banks to measure a loan’s risk in different ways: some banks make their own judgments; others use outside agencies. The recent mortgage crisis prompted banks to reevaluate these methods, in part due to banks having failed to perceive the high level of risk inherent in securitized mortgages. The international community’s response was Basel III, an updated version of its previous standards. This Comment will …

The Global Crackdown On Insider Trading: A Silver Lining To The "Great Reccession", Christopher P. Montagano

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

The wake of the Great Recession marked a period of increased enforcement of insider trading violations by nation-states and self-regulatory organizations overseeing stock markets around the world. Before discussing the heightened global enforcement of insider trading, this Note explains the development of insider trading regulation by focusing on U.S., EU, and China law. This Note argues that the heightened global enforcement of insider trading violations in the wake of the Great Recession is a sign of a shared perception by market regulators around the world that there is a need to restore market confidence. Strong enforcement of insider trading regulations …

Rescuing Expedited Discovery From The Commodity Futures Trading Commission & Returning It To Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(D)(1): Using A Doctrine's Forgotten History To Achieve Legitimacy, Jesse N. Panoff, Esq.

Golden Gate University Law Review

For over a decade, judicial decisions have “authorized” the CFTC to conduct expedited discovery irrespective of 26(d)(1)’s structure and text. Instead, courts typically allow discovery because either: (i) “good cause” exists, or (ii) for no articulated reason at all. Consider that the so-called Good-Cause Test merely proclaims, “[g]ood cause exists for the plaintiff [CFTC] to conduct expedited discovery . . . .” Hence, judicial decisions have developed the doctrine in ways that are attenuated from 26(d)(1). The overall result is if the Commission asks for accelerated discovery, then courts will grant such relief. This is somewhat unsurprising because the very …

A Comparative Law Analysis Of Private Securities Litigation In The Wake Of Morrison V. National Australia Bank, Grant Swanson

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This article examines the recent Supreme Court decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank and its broad implications for private securities litigants going forward. Morrison overturned forty years of jurisprudence when it rejected the conduct and effects tests used in some form by every Circuit Court when determining the extraterritorial reach of Section 10(b) of the Securities Act. The Court instead adopted a transactional test requiring that the security be traded in the United States or otherwise domestic, substantially cutting back the reach of Section 10(b). As a result, many securities litigants will be forced to bring claims in the …

The Emperor Has No Clothes: Confronting The Dc Circuit’S Usurpation Of Sec Rulemaking Authority, James D. Cox, Benjamin J.C. Baucom

Faculty Scholarship

In The Emperor Has No Clothes: Confronting the D.C. Circuit’s Usurpation of SEC Rulemaking Authority, Professor James D. Cox of Duke University School of Law & Benjamin J.C. Baucom, recent law clerk to Justice Don R. Willett of the Supreme Court of Texas, argue “that the level of review invoked by the D.C. Circuit in Business Roundtable and its earlier decisions is dramatically inconsistent with the standard enacted by Congress.” They conclude “that the D.C. Circuit has assumed for itself a role opposed to the one Congress prescribed for courts reviewing SEC rules.”

The 2011 Diane Sanger Memorial Lecture Protecting Investors In Securitization Transactions: Does Dodd–Frank Help, Or Hurt?, Steven L. Schwarcz

Faculty Scholarship

Securitization has been called into question because of its role in the recent financial crisis. Schwarcz examines the potential flaws in the securitization process and compare how the Dodd–Frank Act treats them. Although Dodd–Frank addresses one of the flaws, it underregulates or fails to regulate other flaws. It also overregulates by addressing aspects of securitization that are not flawed.

Regulating Shadow Banking, Steven L. Schwarcz

Faculty Scholarship

Inaugural Address for Boston University Review of Banking & Financial Law's Inaugural Symposium: “Shadow Banking” February 24, 2012.

Although shadow banking is said to be huge, estimated at over $60 trillion, it is not well defined. This short and accessible paper attempts to define shadow banking by identifying its overall scope and its basic characteristics. Based on the definition derived, the paper also conceptually examines how shadow banking can be regulated to try to maximize its efficiencies while minimizing its risks.

Direct And Indirect U.S. Government Debt, Steven L. Schwarcz

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Shareholder Litigation After The Meltdown, Daniel J. Morrissey

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.