Category Archives: Volume 11-1

Auction Rate Securities = Auction Risky Securities

BY AMOD CHOUDHARY

While the financial world was obsessed with the sub-prime mortgage crisis that resulted in a staggering loss of at least $380 billion dollars, a related and equally potent occurrence in the auction rate securities market did not catch the attention of the American public. The reason for the public’s non-interest in auction rate securities may be because it is not well known to the general public outside of financial and legal institutions, or because it was intentionally advertised as something else–cash equivalents. The market failure of auction rate securities has affected the liquidity of approximately $330 billion dollars.
Continue Reading>

Comments Off on Auction Rate Securities = Auction Risky Securities

Filed under Volume 11-1

Sarbanes-Oxley Section 307 Domestically and Abroad: Will Section 307 Lead to International Change?

BY SCOTT H. MOLLETT

The enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (the “Act”) was a seminal event in American securities regulation. Prompted by the spectacular collapse of Enron and other corporate scandals, the Act further developed the United States shareholder-oriented corporate governance mechanisms: a more independent, accountable board, and more technical proficiency in the auditing of company financials.
Continue Reading>

Comments Off on Sarbanes-Oxley Section 307 Domestically and Abroad: Will Section 307 Lead to International Change?

Filed under Volume 11-1

The United States Bankruptcy Code Stamp-Tax Exemption, § 1146(a)…

BY CRAIG JOSEPH SPERLAZZA

The United States Supreme Court found in favor of the Petitioner holding that the Bankruptcy Code’s stamp- tax exemption, § 1146(a), applies only to transfers made under the authority of a Chapter 11 plan that has been previously confirmed.
Continue Reading>

Comments Off on The United States Bankruptcy Code Stamp-Tax Exemption, § 1146(a)…

Filed under Volume 11-1

Injured Investors are Without a Private Right of Action Against Aiders and Abettors of Primary Actors Where the Investors Did Not Rely on the Secondary Actors…

BY DENNIS HOUGH

The Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit by denying an injured investor‘s private right of action against aiders and abettors of the primary actor because the investor did not rely on the secondary actors‘ actions.
Continue Reading>

Comments Off on Injured Investors are Without a Private Right of Action Against Aiders and Abettors of Primary Actors Where the Investors Did Not Rely on the Secondary Actors…

Filed under Volume 11-1

The Attorney-Client Privilege in the European Union and Italy: Time for a Change

BY ANTONIO LORDI

The uproar of the Court of First Instance’s decision in Microsoft Corp. v. Commission in September of 2007 has shadowed the importance of another decision issued by the same tribunal on the same day that actually has much more impact than the former because it involves the entire legal community. The Akzo Nobel Chemicals and Akros Chemicals Ltd. v. Commission decision demonstrates that, despite the intervention of numerous lawyer associations, the European trend of the Court of Justice negating the attorney-client privilege with respect to communications between the corporation and its in-house counsel remains.
Continue Reading>

Comments Off on The Attorney-Client Privilege in the European Union and Italy: Time for a Change

Filed under Volume 11-1

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Can Only Invalidate a Freely Negotiated Contract…

BY JOSEPH L. SMITH

The Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the Ninth Circuit on alternative grounds and remanded to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to evaluate whether the contractual rates were harmful to the public interest, and whether unlawful market manipulation existed.
Continue Reading>

Comments Off on The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Can Only Invalidate a Freely Negotiated Contract…

Filed under Volume 11-1