Legal Remedies Commons^™

Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. V. Curran: Establishing An Implied Private Right Of Action Under The Commodity Exchange Act, Howard E. Hamann

Pepperdine Law Review

In the case of Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Curran, the United States Supreme Court held that there is an implied private right of action under the Commodity Exchange Act, as amended. As a result of this holding, a private party may maintain an action for damages caused by a violation of the Commodity Exchange Act. In this article, the author examines the Supreme Court's analysis and explores the future impact of the decision in light of the role the judiciary has in legislative matters.

Investors And Employees As Relief Defendants In Investment Fraud Receiverships: Promoting Efficiency By Following The Plain Meaning Of "Legitimate Claim Or Ownership Interest", Jared A. Wilkerson

W&M Law Student Publications

Relief defendants are nominal, innocent parties who hold funds traceable to the receivership but have no legitimate claim or ownership interest in them. These nominal parties, as opposed to full or primary defendants, have no cause of action asserted against them, and if they show no legitimate claim to the funds traced to the receivership, the funds are disgorged — generally at summary judgment. This seemingly simple relief defendant tool is used by receivers and regulatory agencies to quickly recover receivership funds for ultimate distribution to creditors. Recently, however, conflict has arisen in federal courts concerning the meaning of “legitimate …

Teamsters Local 445 Freight Division Pension Fund V. Dynex Capital Inc., Erica E. Bonnett

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Investor Compensation Fund, Alicia J. Davis

Articles

The prevailing view among securities regulation scholars is that compensating victims of secondary market securities fraud is inefficient. As the theory goes, diversified investors are as likely to be on the gaining side of a transaction tainted by fraud as the losing side. Therefore, such investors should have no expected net losses from fraud because their expected losses will be matched by expected gains. This Article argues that this view is flawed; even diversified investors can suffer substantial losses from fraud, presenting a compelling case for compensation. The interest in compensation, however, should be advanced by better means than are …

Reassessing Damages In Securities Fraud Class Actions, Elizabeth C. Burch

ExpressO

No coherent doctrinal statement exists for calculating open-market damages for securities fraud class actions. Instead, courts have tried in vain to fashion common-law deceit and misrepresentation remedies to fit open-market fraud. The result is a relatively ineffective system with a hallmark feature: unpredictable damage awards. This poses a significant fraud deterrence problem from both a practical and a theoretical standpoint.

In 2005, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to clarify open-market damage principles and to facilitate earlier dismissal of cases without compensable economic losses. Instead, in Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo, it further confused the damage issue by (1) perpetuating the …

Liability For Misleading Statements Under Section 11, Ted J. Fiflis

Publications

No abstract provided.

Proof Of Scienter Necessary In A Private Suit Under Sec Anti-Fraud Rule 10b-5, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Of the vast amounts of statutory and quasi-statutory material governing the securities business, the Securities and Exchange Commission's rule 10b-51 has potentially the greatest direct importance to the largest number of people. While several provisions in the government's regulatory scheme set more or less specific standards of conduct for securities issuers, broker-dealers, or corporate insiders, the anti-fraud provisions of rule 10b-5 apply to all persons directly or indirectly connected with any sale or purchase of securities transacted through a facility of interstate commerce, the mails, or on a national exchange. In its three clauses, rule 10b-5 forbids any person (1) …