Securities Law Commons^™

Can Section 11 Be Saved?: "Tracing" A Path To Its Survival, John C. Coffee Jr., Joshua Mitts

Faculty Scholarship

Last term, a unanimous Supreme Court held in Slack Techs. v Pirani that purchasers of securities must “trace” their shares to the registration statement that contains the alleged misstatement or omission in order to be able to assert a claim under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933. Lawyers and law firms on both sides of the case agreed (with differing emotions) that the decision eclipsed Section 11, which had been the federal securities laws’ strongest litigation remedy for investors. We disagree with this conclusion that Section 11 is doomed, but we recognize the danger. Both in an amicus …

Amending Regulation D'S Accredited-Investor Definition To Allow Natural Persons To Opt Out Of Unwanted Regulatory Protections, John L. Orcutt

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

No abstract provided.

Calpers V. Anz Securities: Securities Time Bars, Whit Kendall

MC Law Review

Statutes of limitations and statutes of repose are critical mechanisms that help to limit liability in civil actions. In many instances, these two time bars are paired together in order to protect a defendant from an interminable threat of liability. Although these time limits are present in many types of statutes, they are especially important in statutes involving securities offerings because of the need to protect financial security. In the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act"), there are two time bars, a statute of limitations and a statute of repose, which attempt to protect potential defendants from liability regarding the …

Brief Of Law And Business Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents, Macquarie Infrastructure V. Moab Partners, No. 22-1165, Dec. 20, 2023, Joan Macleod Heminway, J. Robert Brown, James D. Cox, Sarah C. Haan, Faith Stevelman

Scholarly Works

Omissions of disclosure required by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC or Commission) in Item 303 of Regulation S-K can be a basis for an action under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act). Disclosures mandated by the SEC in periodic reports are not optional. That these obligations can create a “duty” to disclose under Rule 10b-5(b) is consistent with congressional intent, state court opinions, the common law, and with the longstanding understanding of the federal securities laws (including those of legal scholars and the SEC). This case does not, therefore, seek to “impermissibly expand” the …

Federal Forum Provisions And The Internal Affairs Doctrine, Dhruv Aggarwal, Albert H. Choi, Ofer Eldar

Articles

A key question at the intersection of state and federal law is whether corpo- rations can use their charters or bylaws to restrict securities litigation to federal court. In December 2018, the Delaware Chancery Court answered this question in the negative in the landmark decision Sciabacucchi v. Salzberg. The court invalidated “federal forum provisions” (“FFPs”) that allow companies to select federal district courts as the exclusive venue for claims brought under the Secur- ities Act of 1933 (“1933 Act”). The decision held that the internal affairs doc- trine, which is the bedrock of U.S. corporate law, does not permit charter …

The Sec's Regulation A+: Small Business Goes Under The Bus Again, Rutheford B. Campbell Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Title IV of the JOBS Act, which is entitled "Small Company Capital Formation," requires the Securities and Exchange Commission to adopt new rules regarding offerings under Regulation A. The Commission has now adopted its final regulations implementing Title IV and providing a new regulatory regime for exempt offerings under Section 3(b) of the Securities Act of 1933. The new regime is generally referred to as Regulation A+.

Unfortunately, history and empirical data regarding the use of Regulation A and Regulation D strongly suggest that the final Regulation A+ rules are unlikely to provide any material relief for small businesses in …

A Cautionary Look At A Cautionary Doctrine, Andrew W. Fine

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

Optimism is an indispensable element of effective salesmanship. It is therefore quite natural for the directors of public companies to want to optimistically tout the potential long-term benefits of investing in their companies. After all, directors of public companies must be empowered to attract the attention and money of American investors. But what happens if these long-term projections fail to come true? Who is to blame for long-term projections that are simply unrealistic? A doctrine called the “bespeaks caution” doctrine has emerged in order to govern these inquiries, and holds that these optimistic forward-looking statements are legally immunized provided that …

The Facebook Status That Sparked An Sec Investigation: Regulation Fair Disclosure And The Growth Of Social Media, Alyssa Wanser

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Downstream Securities Regulation, Anita Krug

All Faculty Scholarship

Securities regulation wears two hats. Its “upstream” side governs firms in connection with their obtaining financing in the securities markets. That is, it regulates firms’ and issuers’ offers and sales of securities, whether in public offerings to retail investors or in private offerings to institutional investors. Its “downstream” side, by contrast, governs financial services providers, who assist with investors’ activities in those markets. Their services include providing advice regarding securities investments, as investment advisers do; aggregating investors’ assets for purposes of enabling those investors to invest their assets collectively, as mutual funds do; and acting as “middlemen” between buyers and …

Alternatives For Small Business Raising Capital Under The Securities Act Of 1933, David H. Barber

Pepperdine Law Review

The problems encountered by the business community in raising capital for new or small businesses has spurned implementation of responsive policy and regulations by the Securities and Exchange Commission. As a result of input from a series of nationwide small business hearings, the S.E.C. has recently demonstrated its commitment to aiding capital raising needs. This was accomplished by creating an Office of Small Business Policy to respond to the effects of major new changes to the Securities Act of 1933 which seek to facilitate the process of capitalization of small business. Professor David H. Barber, of Brigham Young University's J. …

Revisiting 'Truth In Securities Revisited': Abolishing Ipos And Harnessing Private Markets In The Public Good, Adam C. Pritchard

Articles

My thesis is that the transition between private- and public-company status could be less bumpy if we unify the public-private dividing line under the Securities Act and Exchange Act. The insight builds on Cohen's thought experiment where Congress first enacted the Exchange Act. My proposed public-private standard would take the company-registration model to its logical conclusion. The customary path to public-company status is through an IPO, typically with simultaneous listing of the shares on an exchange. There is nothing about public offerings, however, that makes them inherently antecedent to public-company status. What if companies became public, with required periodic disclosures …

Below Investment Grade And Above The Law: A Past, Present And Future Look At The Accountability Of Credit Rating Agencies, Marilyn Blumberg Cane, Adam Shamir, Tomas Jodar

Faculty Scholarship

This article covers the evolution of the credit rating industry, in particular, the noteworthy shift from purchaser-subscriber to issuer pay model. It then describes the history of SEC CRA regulatory measures, most notably the adoption of SEC Rule 436(g), adopted in 1982, which specifically eliminated liability for the big CRAs (Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s, Fitch’s and Duff and Phelps) as “experts” under Sections 7 and 11 of the Securities Act of 1933. The article then covers the Credit Rating Agency Reform Act of 2006 and the adoption of SEC Rule 17g-5 in an attempt to control conflicts of interest within …

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 …

Facebook, The Jobs Act, And Abolishing Ipos, Adam C. Pritchard

Articles

Initial public offerings (IPOs)-the first sale of private firms' stock to the public-are a bellwether of investor sentiment. Investors must be bullish if they are putting their money into untested start-ups. IPOs are frequently cited in the business press as a key barometer of the health of financial markets. Politicians, too, see a steady flow of IPOs as an indicator that capital is fueling the entrepreneurial initiative that sustains the growth of new businesses. Growing businesses create jobs, so Republicans and Democrats can find common ground on the importance of promoting IPOs. That bipartisan consensus was on display this spring …

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 …

Removal Of Covered Class Actions Under Slusa: The Failure Of Plain Meaning And Legislative Intent As Interpretative Devices, And The Supreme Court's Decisive Solution, J. Tyler Butts

William & Mary Business Law Review

No abstract provided.

Securities Law And The New Deal Justices, Adam C. Pritchard, Robert B. Thompson

Articles

In this Article, we explore the role of the New Deal Justices in enacting, defending, and interpreting the federal securities laws. Although we canvass most of the Court's securities law decisions from 1935 to 1955, we focus in particular on PUHCA, an act now lost to history for securities practitioners and scholars. At the time of the New Deal, PUHCA was the key point of engagement for defining the judicial view toward New Deal securities legislation. Taming the power of Wall Street required not just the concurrence of the legislative branch, but also the Supreme Court, a body that the …

Capital Offense: The Sec's Continuing Failure To Address Small Business Financing Concerns, Stuart R. Cohn, Gregory C. Yadley

UF Law Faculty Publications

Despite years of criticism from small business advocates, the Securities and Exchange Commission has made little effort to ameliorate the severe burdens on small companies seeking to raise capital in compliance with the Securities Act of 1933 and SEC regulations. Substantial SEC attention has been given in recent years to improving the capacity of large, publicly-held companies to market securities, but smaller companies have suffered from less-than-benign neglect. Responding to this concern, the SEC recently adopted several proposals, and has others pending, aimed at small business financing. These proposals and adoptions, while modestly helpful, fall far short of addressing the …

Regulation A: Small Businesses’ Search For “A Moderate Capital”, Rutheford B. Campbell Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Small businesses are an important part of our national economy, accounting for as much as 40% of our total economic activity and providing society with important services and products.

Small businesses face daunting economic, structural, and legal impediments when they attempt to acquire external capital. The absence of financial inter-mediation services means that they are almost always on their own to find investors. Their small capital needs mean that their relative offering costs are often sky high. Federal and state securities rules significantly exacerbate these economic and structural disadvantages by imposing onerous and unwarranted conditions on their search for external …

Tracing, Peter B. Oh

ExpressO

Tracing is a method that appears within multiple fields of law. Distinct conceptions of tracing, however, have arisen independently within securities and remedial law. In the securities context plaintiffs must “trace” their securities to a specific offering to pursue certain relief under the Securities Act of 1933. In the remedial context victims who “trace” their misappropriated value into a wrongdoer’s hands can claim any derivative value, even if it has appreciated.

This article is the first to compare and then cross-apply tracing within these two contexts. Specifically, this article argues that securities law should adopt a version of the “rules-based …

Preference Determinations Concerning Bankruptcy Reform Act Of 1978 And Securities Act Of 1933, Securities And Exchange Act Of 1934, And Commodity Exchange Act, J. B. Grossman

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Law, Share Price Accuracy, And Economic Performance: The New Evidence, Merritt B. Fox, Randall Morck, Bernard Yeung, Artyom Durnev

Michigan Law Review

Mandatory disclosure has been at the core of U.S. securities regulation since its adoption in the early 1930s. For many decades, this fixture of our financial system was accepted with little examination. Over the last twenty years, however, mandatory disclosure has been subject to intensifying intellectual crosscurrents. Some commentators hold out the U.S. system as the standard for the world. They argue that adoption by other countries of a U.S.-styled system, with its greater corporate transparency, would enhance their economic performance. Other commentators, in contrast, insist that the U.S. mandatory disclosure regime represents a mistake, not a model. These crosscurrents …

The Securities Acts' Treatment Of Notes Maturing In Less Than Nine Months: A Solution To The Enigma, Wendy Gerwick Couture

Articles

No abstract provided.

Regulation S - Rules Governing Offers And Sales Made Outside The United States Without Registration Under The Securities Act Of 1933, Caroline Mary Rutherford Lee

LLM Theses and Essays

Underpinning a regulatory regime is a dichotomy between achieving certainty of outcome and achieving perceived fairness. While such a discussion may seem out of place in the context of a regulatory regime dealing with offshore offerings, it nonetheless serves to emphasize some of the considerations encountered in the following examination of Regulation S. Part Two of this thesis outlines the development of the disclosure regime that is evidenced in the United States Federal Securities Regulations and then goes on to examine how this regime, first established in the 1930s, dealt with the advent of globalization. Part Three then looks at …

The Insidious Remnants Of State Rules Respecting Capital Formation, Rutheford B. Campbell Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

As we move into the Twenty-First Century, state blue sky laws and regulations continue to govern a significant portion of the capital formation activities of our domestic businesses. As a result, state administrators, influenced by their historically informed preferences and local traditions, continue to play important roles when businesses attempt to access external capital sources.

Today, however, the effects of state blue sky laws, regulations, and administrators on capital formation are felt almost exclusively by small businesses. The capital formation activities of larger businesses generally have been freed from state control, most recently by the preemption contained in the National …

Pleading Under Section 11 Of The Securities Act Of 1933, Krista L. Turnquist

Michigan Law Review

The Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act") requires full and fair disclosure of the nature of securities sold in interstate and foreign commerce. Section 11 of the Securities Act prohibits false or misleading registration statements. It also provides buyers a private remedy for false or misleading statements against any signer of the registration statement, any partner or director of the issuer, any professional involved in preparing or certifying the statement, and any underwriter. The rule appears simple: if there is a material misstatement or omission in the registration statement, the buyer may sue the seller. Courts disagree, however, over how …

The Overwhelming Case For Elimination Of The Integration Doctrine Under The Securities Act Of 1933, Rutheford B. Campbell Jr.

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Limited Public Offer In German And U.S. Securities Law: A Comparative Analysis Of Prospectus Act Section 2(2) And Rule 505 Of Regulation D, David B. Guenther

Michigan Journal of International Law

This Note examines the "limited circle of persons" exception in section 2(2) of the Prospectus Act in comparison to similar provisions of U.S. federal securities law, particularly Section 3(b) of the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act") and Rule 505 of Regulation D ("Rule 505"). Comparison of the Prospectus Act to U.S. securities law seems both warranted and useful. Certain aspects of German securities law are broadly modeled on U.S. precedents. U.S. securities laws reflect more than sixty-five years of experience defining (and re-defining) public and limited public offers and private placements. U.S. securities regulators have also displayed in …

Regulation S And Offshore Capital: Will The New Amendments Rid The Safe Harbor Of Pirates?, Jon B. Jordan

Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business

This article will explain how the securities laws were prior to Regulation S as they applied to the offshore offer and sale of securities. The regulation as originally adopted and the brand new safe harbors it brought to the laws governing offshore offers and sales will also be explored. Then the subsequent regulatory abuses and concerns in the marketplace surrounding the regulation and the Commission's response to these issues will be discussed. The amendments to Regulation S which eventually served as the Commission's way of halting these problems and the changes they brought to the regulation will be laid out. …

Blue Sky Laws And The Recent Congressional Preemption Failure, Rutheford B. Campbell Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Laws regarding the sale of securities may be understood as responses to perceived bargaining failures. The most extreme examples of these bargaining failures are seen in instances in which investors are intentionally misled or defrauded regarding the quality of the investments they receive for their money. Even without the presence of such culpability, however, bargaining failures are likely anytime the trading parties lack sufficient, accurate information necessary to effect value-enhancing trades. When that occurs in trades for capital, the parties to the transaction are misinformed respecting the trade, expectations are not protected, and that precious commodity, capital, may be turned …