Search results

1 – 2 of 2
Article
Publication date: 7 November 2016

Joan McKown, Henry Klehm III, Harold Gordon, David Woodcock and Daniel Bradley

To explain and evaluate amendments to the rules of practice governing the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC’s) Administrative Proceedings that were adopted by the…

102

Abstract

Purpose

To explain and evaluate amendments to the rules of practice governing the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC’s) Administrative Proceedings that were adopted by the Commission on July 13, 2016.

Design/methodology/approach

Describes SEC’s increased pursuit of enforcement actions in APs, criticisms of the AP process, and corrective legislation. Describes the July 2016 amendments covering expansion of the prehearing period, allowance of depositions, timing for completion of document production in discovery phase, required disclosure of affirmative defenses, permitted dispositive motions, and admissibility of hearsay evidence. Assesses the practical impact of the amendments. Makes recommendations concerning advanced preparation for APs, depositions and witness-interview strategies, particular care concerning statements in Wells submission, availability of investigative record to defense counsel, admissibility of hearsay evidence, and defenses based on reliance on counsel.

Findings

The amended rules are a step in the right direction but do not fully correct the numerous and severe imbalances that exist in the Commission’s administrative enforcement process with respect to the availability of various discovery mechanisms, the timeline for trying a case, and more.

Practical implications

Every entity or individual that is involved in an SEC enforcement investigation, or that may become a respondent in an SEC Administrative Proceeding, should take certain practical steps such as those recommended in this article to minimize the structural disadvantages it will face and to maximize the benefits conferred by these latest amendments to the rules of practice.

Originality/value

Practical background and guidance from experienced enforcement, litigation, securities and financial services lawyers.

Details

Journal of Investment Compliance, vol. 17 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1528-5812

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 4 July 2016

David Woodcock and Joan McKown

To note the increase in accounting and financial reporting matters at the Securities and Exchange Commission by highlighting a number of recent cases filed by the agency.

284

Abstract

Purpose

To note the increase in accounting and financial reporting matters at the Securities and Exchange Commission by highlighting a number of recent cases filed by the agency.

Design/methodology/approach

The SEC recently announced the settlement or filing of a number of significant accounting fraud cases. Coupled with recent statements by the SEC and the Department of Justice, it is clear that accounting fraud is a priority and that individuals are in the cross-hairs. This article discusses a few of the recent cases and the trend toward more financial reporting and issuer disclosure cases.

Findings

The number of financial reporting and issuer disclosure cases will likely continue to increase. Individuals will be targeted in more of those cases, internal controls will be a focus, whistleblowers will continue to be important in this area, and SOX 304 clawbacks will continue to be a weapon for the SEC.

Originality/value

Practical guidance from experienced securities and financial services lawyers.

Details

Journal of Investment Compliance, vol. 17 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1528-5812

Keywords

1 – 2 of 2