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.

Mid-Year Report Finds Securities Class Action Filings on Decline, But Financial Services Firms Named as Defendants in Increasing Number of Suits

 Federal securities class action activity declined in the first half of 2009, with a particularly significant decline in the second quarter, according to the Securities Class Action Filings—2009: Mid-Year Assessment, an annual report prepared by the Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse in cooperation with Cornerstone Research.

According to the report, a total of 87 federal securities class actions were filed in the first half of 2009, a 22.3 percent decline from the 112 filings in both halves of 2008.  Only 35 filings were observed in the second quarter, the lowest quarterly total since the first quarter of 2007.  While filings are on the decline, the report also found that financial services firms have been named as defendants in 66.7% of filings this year, an increase over the 50% share of all filings in 2008.

Professor Joseph Grundfest, Director of the Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse commented that “[s]ecurities litigation activity continues to be driven by claims against financial services firms, but all the large firms in the industry have already been sued.  Plaintiffs are therefore filing claims against the smaller number of smaller financial services firms yet to be sued.”

Among the report’s key findings:

  • About half of the filings so far in 2009 were driven by the credit crisis, with 42 filings in the first half of the year containing allegations related to the credit crisis.
  • Financial firms have been named as defendants in an increasing number of suits. 12.8 percent of companies in the S&P 500 classified by Bloomberg as financial were named as defendants, accounting for 41.2 percent of the market capitalization of that sector.  (See below chart)
  • There were 15 filings related to Ponzi schemes thus far in 2009. The majority of these lawsuits, 11 filings, were on behalf of investors in Madoff funds, with most suits targeting so-called feeder funds, hedge funds, and other financial intermediaries that invested their clients’ money with Madoff.