Judge continues scrutiny of BofA-SEC settlement

At yesterday’s hearing on BofA’s proposed $33 million settlement of an SEC civil suit, Judge Jed S. Rakoff of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York continued to withhold his consent for the settlement, stating that he needs more time and information before deciding whether to approve the settlement. Judge Rakoff requested further filings by August 24th, and told the parties he would not be able to approve the settlement prior to September 9th.

The SEC’s complaint, initially filed on August 3rd, states that BofA made “materially false and misleading statements in the joint proxy statement that it filed with Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. (“Merrill”) in connection with Bank of America’s $50 billion acquisition of Merrill on January 1, 2009.” Specifically, the SEC alleges that BofA authorized Merrill to pay up to $5.8 billion in bonuses, despite telling investors in proxy documents that Merrill had agreed not to award year-end performance bonuses or incentive pay before the merger closed. Merrill would ultimately pay $3.6 billion in bonuses, according to the SEC.

One issue on which Judge Rakoff focused his questioning was who at BofA was responsible for not disclosing that Merrill could award $5.8 billion in incentives and bonuses to employees. At one point the Judge asked David Rosenfeld, the associate regional director of the SEC’s New York office, “[w]as it some sort of ghost? Who were these people? Mr. Thain and Mr. Lewis would seem to be responsible, yes?” John Thain was the CEO at Merrill during negotiations of the sale to BofA, and Kenneth Lewis is BofA’s CEO. Rosenfeld responded, in part, that the SEC “can’t infer” misconduct from an accelerated bonus schedule.

Judge Rakoff also requested additional information on how the settlement figure of $33 million was arrived upon by the parties. “Don’t I need to know what the truth is to make a determination?” the Judge questioned. If BofA indeed broke the law by not disclosing the bonus payments in proxy materials, Judge Rakoff asked, “is there not something strangely askew in a fine of $33 million?” when compared to the billions that were paid in bonuses? Rosenfeld, on behalf of the SEC, responded that the settlement figure was “fair and reasonable” based upon prior cases.

Judge Rakoff concluded that he wants more information to determine whether the settlement amount is appropriate and whether an evidentiary hearing might be necessary, commenting that he “would be less than candid” if he didn’t “express [his] continued misgivings about the settlement at this stage.

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://www.financialserviceslitigationmonitor.com/admin/trackback/150440
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?
Send To A Friend Use this form to send this entry to a friend via email.