By Bonnie Watson, J.D. Candidate 2015
In Levitt v. J.P. Morgan Sec., Inc., 10-4596-CV, 2013 WL 1007678 (2d Cir. Mar. 15, 2013), the Second Circuit reversed a district court’s grant of class certification to a group of plaintiffs who alleged that Bear Sterns (subsequently bought by J.P. Morgan) had violated its duty to disclose when it did not notify investors of a fraudulent scheme by Sterling Foster, a now-defunct brokerage firm. Continue reading
By Andrew Sioson, J.D. Candidate 2013
High-frequency trading firms, who may be distorting financial market prices by conducting transactions with themselves, are drawing scrutiny from U.S. regulators. Investigations of so-called wash trades by the Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”), Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”), and Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) represent another episode in the struggle to understand and properly regulate high-frequency trading activity.
By Kirkland & Ellis LLP
[Editor's Note: The following post is a Kirkland & Ellis M&A Update, authored by Daniel E.Wolf, Sarkis Jebejian, Joshua M. Zachariah, and David B. Feirstein.]
With valuations stabilizing and the M&A market heating up, a rebirth of stock-for-stock deals, after a long period of dominance for all-cash transactions, may be in the offing.
By Libby Hadzima, J.D./M.B.A. Candidate 2015
On April 3, 2013, the Berkeley Center for Law, Business and the Economy (BCLBE) hosted a Social Entrepreneurship: Legal, Financial and Public Policy Dimensions panel moderated by Professor Eric Talley. Panelists included legal experts R. Todd Johnson (Partner, Jones Days), Jonathan Storper (Partner, Hanson Bridgett), Kyle Westaway (Founder of Westaway Law) and Jordan Breslow (General Counsel at New Island Capital) as well as Vince Siciliano (CEO and President of the New Resources Bank). Continue reading
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco
Professor Dr. Christoph Paulus, Humboldt University Berlin
Chair: Professor Barry Eichengreen, UC Berkeley, Department of Economics
This event is by invitation only. Collaboration with the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
Professor Paulus is a leading academic expert on the political and legal issues of sovereign financial distress and the author of several books, articles, and policy reports on the mechanisms of resolving sovereign defaults. Since 2005, he has been consultant to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) on the insolvency statutes of transition states, the insolvency proceedings for states under the sovereign debt restructuring mechanism (SDRM), and on the draft of the IMF Principles and Guidelines for Insolvency Proceedings. He was consultant to the World Bank concerning the “odious debt” problem; and from 2006-2010 the Advisor of the German Delegation to the UNCITRAL project for the development of a group insolvency law.
Professor Paulus is Director of the Institute for Interdisciplinary Restructuring (Berlin), and an editor of the International Insolvency Law Review and of the Norton Annual Review of International Insolvency. His prior US background includes post-graduate study at UC Berkeley, School of Law, where he was awarded the LL.M. in 1984, and where he held the Lynen Scholar position of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation in 1989-90. He is a Fellow of the American College of Bankruptcy and a Member of the International Insolvency Institute. Professor Paulus currently is working on the structure and role of Collective Action Clauses in connection with the Argentine and Greek debt crises. A recent paper on these mechanisms, in the context of longer-term sovereign financial distress, will be distributed in advance to attendees at the meeting.
April 19-20, 2013 (Friday and Saturday)
Boalt Hall
This event is by invitation only. Co-sponsored by the European Union Center of Excellence and the Miller Institute for Global Challenges and the Law
The workshop focuses on the challenges that increased global competition poses for financial regulation, and the concerns that growing financial markets raise for the safety and soundness of the U.S. and global financial system. U.S. financial institutions had long dominated international markets by developing international networks of clients and providing companies around the world with access to U.S. stock exchanges. However, increased globalization brought new challenges for U.S. regulators and policymakers. The last decade saw a wave of new financial centers, from London to Hong Kong and from Frankfurt to Shanghai, which challenge the U.S. markets’ preeminence in financial services. European stalwarts and emerging economies alike compete fiercely with the United States, diverting new capital away from American businesses, attracting thousands of jobs, and depriving tax revenue from the U.S. government.
To improve their competitive position in the global marketplace, governments sometimes offer to private firms favorable regulatory treatment. In other cases, countries sought to address the growing needs of ever-expanding market by creating many new international bodies, which sought to harmonize financial regulation. Amidst intensifying global competition for finance, the 2007-2008 crisis was a watershed event. Illustrious financial institutions, which had been previously considered the most highly sophisticated investors, reached collapse or near-collapse. As a result, stability concerns engulfed the financial system, leading the U.S. economy into a deep recession. Regulatory agencies failed to grasp the full extent of the problem. After addressing imminent risks, governments reevaluated their stance towards financial markets, abandoning the mantra of flexible regulation in favor of a more conscious effort to rein in financial excesses.
By Christopher Hammond, J.D. Candidate 2015 | April 4, 2013 at 3:16 pm
The Obama Administration has continued its aggressive prosecution of suspect players in the financial meltdown that shaped most of the President’s first term. Continue reading
