Securities Law Commons^™

Segmented Settlements Are Not The Answer: A Response To Professor Squire’S Article, How Collective Settlements Camouflage The Costs Of Shareholder Lawsuits, Christopher C. French

Faculty Scholarship

In his recent article, Professor Richard Squire offers a provocative theory in which he claims the underlying claimants in shareholder litigation against corporate policyholders are overcompensated due to what he describes as “cramdown” settlements, under which insurers are forced to settle due to the “duty to contribute” that arises under multi-layered directors and officers (“D&O”) insurance programs. He also offers a novel idea regarding how this problem could be fixed by what he refers to as “segmented” settlements in which each insurer and the policyholder would be allowed to settle separately and consider only its own interests in doing so. …

Lies Without Liars? Janus Capital And Conservative Securities Jurisprudence, Donald C. Langevoort

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Supreme Court’s recent Janus Capital case offers a reading of the word “make” in Rule 10b-5 that speaks to ultimate legal authority over the communication in question. This creates the real possibility that we can have lies without liars, an entirely perplexing result in terms of any purposive meaning of the rule. In so holding, Justice Thomas joined a seemingly short list of judges who suggest that legal formalism is a particularly good weapon with which to fight securities fraud. This paper exploresJanus through the lens of conservative textualism, which takes us through a much longer intellectual history …

When The Government Attempts To Change The Board, Investors Should Know, William O. Fisher

Law Faculty Publications

In 2008 and 2009, the federal government effectively hired and fired directors at American International Group and Bank of America. At AIG, the government exercised its power through the ownership of voting stock, which meant that the company’s public securities filings revealed the government influence, though at times slowly and at times only by inference. At BofA, by contrast, the government imposed its will through an unpublished bank regulatory action, and no securities filing provided even a hint of the federal role. The fact that current law allows the government to secretly reconstitute the governing bodies of multi-billion-dollar, publicly traded …

Reves Revisited, Janet Kerr, Karen M. Eisenhauer

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Limited Liability Company As A Security, Mark I. Steinberg, Karen L. Conway

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Are Limited Liability Company Interests Securities?, Mark A. Sargent

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Collateral Participant Liability Under State Securities Laws, Douglas M. Branson

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

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

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mandatory Class Action Lawsuits As A Restructuring Technique, Bryant B. Edwards, Jeffrey A. Herbst, Selina K. Hewitt

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Corporate Governance: Some Unasked Questions A Personal Commentary, Henry Lesser

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Foreword, Marc I. Steinberg

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Innovative Link Between The Internet, The Capital Markets, And The Sec: How The Internet Direct Public Offering Helps Small Companies Looking To Raise Capital, Daniel Everett Giddings

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Framework For Analyzing Attorney Liability Under Section 10(B) And Rule 10b-5, Gary M. Bishop

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “Lawyers who make their living representing securities issuers face a myriad of challenges. Securities lawyers must navigate and master an intricate body of statutory, regulatory, and case law at both the state and the federal level and ensure that their clients comply with the law. The compliance requirement, however, is not limited to the issuer clients. Defrauded investors will often seek recovery of their losses from both the issuer of the failed investment securities and from the lawyers who represent the issuer, which only exacerbates the complexity of the securities lawyer’s work. These securities fraud actions against lawyers raise …

Spacs And The Jobs Act, Usha Rodrigues

Scholarly Works

The law has long confined the average investor to trading in public securitieswhile allowing wealthy—or “accredited”—individual investors access to a panoply of private securities, including investment vehicles such as hedge funds and private equity funds. Nevertheless, pressure to let the general public into private equity has been growing. Two forces have contributed to this mounting pressure. First, public investors are eager to try their hand at investing in private enterprise. Second, private firms need capital. In the face of these forces, the sharp line that has long separated public and private firms has become increasingly blurred

Consider the story of …

Determining The Proper Pleading Standard Under The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act Of 1995 After In Re Silicon Graphics , Erin Brady

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Securities Law—The Erosion Of Securities Class Actions, Rashida Sims

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

In the last fifteen years, Congress has enacted Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (collectively the "securities legislation"). This note examines interrelated provisions of the securities legislation and the resulting impact on the effectiveness of class actions as a remedy for defrauded investors. First, the note discusses securities class actions and the background, history, and intended goal of each relevant legislative provision. Next, the note discusses the securities legislation's impact on the feasibility of securities class actions, the parties to securities class actions, …

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 …

Corporate Criticism On The Internet: The Fine Line Between Anonymous Speech And Cybersmear, Scot Wilson

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Unraveling The Mystery Of Wilko V. Swan: American Arbitration Vacatur Law And The Accidental Demise Of Party Autonomy , James M. Gaitis

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article begins with a brief description of what the Wilko Court said with respect to the vacatur of arbitral awards and how federal and state appellate courts have construed that language. Traditional American arbitration vacatur law, including but not limited to the cases relied upon by the Wilko Court, are then reviewed in depth such that the Wilko decision and the Wilko Court's choice of language may be placed in context and fully examined. The intent and proper operation of the FAA are then discussed based on both the legislative history of the FAA and other authorities that consistently …

Malack V. Bdo Seidman, Llp: Gatekeepers Not So Conflicted In The Fraud-Created-The-Market Theory, Chelsea Ortega

Journal of Business & Technology Law

No abstract provided.

Is Canada The New Shangri-La Of Global Securities Class Actions?, Tanya J. Monestier

Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business

There has been significant academic buzz about Silver v. Imax, an Ontario case certifying a global class of shareholders alleging statutory and common law misrepresentation in connection with a secondary market distribution of shares. Although global class actions on a more limited scale have been certified in Canada prior to Imax, it can now be said that global classes have “officially” arrived in Canada. Many predict that the Imax decision means that Ontario will become the new center for the resolution of global securities disputes. This is particularly so after the United States largely relinquished this role in Morrison v. …

The Meaning Of The Market Myth, Benjamin Means

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

This Book Review contends that the perfectly rational market may be a myth, not just in the sense of a false or over-simplified account of reality, but also in the deeper, anthropological sense of cultural explanation. Part I describes how rational-market theories were developed by financial economists and applied to Wall Street, sometimes without adequate appreciation for the difference between simplified economic models and real-world behavior. Part II contends that if the rational-market theory has met with acceptance that outstrips its empirical support, the favorable reception may be explained in part by the theory’s congruence with broader normative views about …

The End Of The Internal Compliance World As We Know It, Or An Enhancement Of The Effectiveness Of Securities Law Enforcement? Bounty Hunting Under The Dodd-Frank Act's Whistleblower Provision, Justin Blount, Spencer Markel

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

In the wake of Bernard Madoff’s $65 billion Ponzi scheme and the recent economic crisis stemming largely from loosely regulated subprime lending and mortgage-backed securities, President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act on July 21, 2010, signaling loudly and clearly that change is coming to Wall Street. But Wall Street is not the only one receiving a message. Buried deep within the 2,319 pages of the Dodd-Frank Act, companies can find Section 922, the whistleblower provision, which provides a bounty for whistleblowers who report securities violations to the Securities and Exchange Commission.These bounty provisions and …

Burning Down The House Or Simply Rolling The Dice: A Comment On Section 621 Of The Dodd-Frank Act And Recommendation For Its Implementation, Joshua R. Rosenthal

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

Section 621 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act modifies the Securities Act of 1933 to prohibit the underwriter, placement agent, initial purchaser, or sponsor, or any affiliate or subsidiary of any such entity of an asset-backed financial product from betting against that very product for one year after the product’s initial sale. The rule prohibits anyone who structures or sells an asset-backed security or a product composed of asset-backed securities from going short, in the specified timeframe, on what they have sold, and labels such transactions as presenting material conflicts of interest. This Comment discusses traces …

Regulation A And The Jobs Act: A Failure To Resuscitate, Rutheford B. Campbell Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Regulation A offers small businesses an exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933. The exemption is generally consistent with the obligation of the Securities and Exchange Commission to fashion exemptions that balance investor protection and capital formation. From the perspective of small businesses, the exemption may appear to provide an efficient access to external capital.

Regulation A, however, has fallen into nearly complete disuse. The millions of small businesses in this country, all of which at some point need external capital to survive and grow, simply do not use Regulation A.

Two reasons account for small …

Regulation Llc, Raymond P. Girnys

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

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.

Warning: Your Lcc Interest Might Be A Security, Wendy Gerwick Couture

Articles

No abstract provided.

The Wreck Of Regulation D: The Unintended (And Bad) Outcomes For The Sec’S Crown Jewel Exemptions, Rutheford B. Campbell Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Regulation D is—or at least should be—the crown jewel of the Securities and Exchange Commission's regulatory exemptions from the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933. It offers businesses—especially businesses with relatively small capital requirements—fair and efficient access to vital, external capital.

In this article, I present data derived from deep samples of recent Form Ds filed with the Commission. The data show that Regulation D is not working in the way the Commission intended or in a way that benefits society The data reveal that companies attempting to raise relatively small amounts of capital under Regulation D overwhelmingly …

Mismatch: The Misuse Of Market Efficiency In Market Manipulation Class Actions, Charles R. Korsmo

William & Mary Law Review

Plaintiffs commonly bring two distinct types of claims under section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: (1) claims of material misrepresentations or omissions, and (2) claims of tradebased market manipulation. Despite the distinctive features of the two types of claims, courts have tended to treat them identically when applying the “fraud on the market” doctrine. In particular, courts have required both types of plaintiffs to make identical showings that the relevant security was traded in an “efficient market” in order to gain a presumption of reliance. The reasons for requiring such a showing by plaintiffs in a misrepresentation …