Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
CASE BRIEFS
A New York trial court will decide whether the 'disgorgement' portion of the largest securities regulatory settlement in history is covered under a $100 million Professional Liability policy. In a time of increasingly aggressive securities regulation the court's decision will likely have a wide impact on firms that have or are considering regulatory settlements.
The case stems from an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the NASD into how Credit Suisse First Boston (CSFB) allocated shares in 'hot' IPOs for which it served as an underwriter. In a civil suit filed in January 2002, the SEC charged that CSFB had violated federal securities laws and regulations as well as NASD rules by allocating IPO shares to customers who agreed to pay excessive commissions in unrelated securities transactions. Shortly after the suit was filed CSFB agreed to settle. Without conceding any of the SEC's substantive allegations, CSFB nevertheless consented to the entry of a permanent injunction against 'sharing profits of CSFB customers in exchange for allocations of shares in [IPOs] underwritten by CSFB.' It also agreed to make payments of $100 million to the U.S. Treasury, the SEC and the NASD. Of that amount, $30 million was deemed to be a 'civil penalty' and $70 million was deemed to represent 'disgorgement of monies obtained improperly by CSFB ' '
After reaching its civil settlement, CSFB turned to the primary and excess liability insurers from whom it had purchased a $100 million 'Global Combined Specialty Insurance Policy'. Implicitly conceding that the $30 million fine was uninsurable, it demanded coverage of the $70 million 'disgorgement.' The insurers ' Vigilant Insurance Company, Lloyds, Continental Casualty, Travelers Casualty and Swiss Re ' responded with a denial of coverage and a declaratory judgment lawsuit in New York State Supreme Court.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.