Report: More SEC Enforcement Actions, Record High Use of Administrative Law Judges
It's the first time at least since 2010 that 100% of the SEC's actions were brought before an administrative law judge, according to a new report from NYU and Cornerstone Research. By comparison, in 2010 only 32% were administrative rather than filed in court.
May 15, 2019 at 05:00 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Corporate Counsel
Despite critics who have challenged the legality of the process, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed every public company enforcement action in the first half of fiscal 2019 as an administrative proceeding, according to a new report.
The report, “SEC Enforcement Activity: Public Companies and Subsidiaries—Midyear FY 2019 Update,” was released Wednesday by the New York University Pollack Center for Law & Business and Cornerstone Research.
Law professor Stephen Choi, director of the Pollack Center and co-author of the report, told Corporate Counsel it's the first time at least since 2010, when the center began its SEC records database, that 100% of the SEC's actions were brought before an administrative law judge. By comparison, in 2010 only 32% were administrative rather than filed in court.
“It was a big surprise,” Choi said, “because they have been the topic of some debate. Traditionally [since 2013] the SEC has brought most actions as administrative procedures, but I was surprised at 100% this year.”
The law professor said he didn't know why all the actions took this venue. “It could just be a onetime thing,” he explained.
The report shows that the most enforcement actions by far were taken against the finance, insurance and real estate industry division at 67%, with 12% against manufacturers and the remainder spread out over other industries. That trend has held true most years since 2010.
Choi said general counsel would be especially interested in the statistics showing monetary settlements and company cooperation. In this six-month period, the report says a record high 88% of defendant companies cooperated with SEC investigations. That compared to an average of 51% for the previous nine years.
In this period, over half of company defendants self-reported their violations, compared with the nine-year average of only 13%.
“The overall trend from 2010 to the present is that cooperation is increasing each year,” Choi noted. “That corresponds with the growth of internal compliance at companies.”
The report also shows that total enforcement actions remained at near-record levels through the fiscal year's first half, which ended March 31. That was true despite the federal government shutdown during which the SEC suspended non-emergency enforcement for one month.
“The overall number of new actions are back to historical averages,” Choi said. “In late 2017 and early 2018, with a change in chairs at the SEC, the numbers dropped dramatically, but they are back up now.”
Co-author Sara Gilley, Cornerstone Research vice president, noted that the enforcement numbers were boosted by the SEC's Share Class Selection Disclosure Initiative, in which investment advisers self-reported inadequate disclosures concerning the sale of mutual fund shares. Of the 52 total actions taken, 25 involved the share initiative.
Gilley said in a statement that none of the 25 monetary settlements for actions brought under the Share Class Initiative included civil penalties. She explained the lack of penalties is “consistent with the SEC's stated incentive to recommend no civil penalties for self-reporting. In comparison, 88% of the other 26 monetary settlements in the first half of FY 2019 included civil penalties.”
Choi also noted the absence of civil penalties against the investment advisers led to a lower average settlement amount. The report shows an average monetary settlement of $15 million per action during the period, compared with the historical average settlement of $29 million per action.
Looking to the future, the law professor said there are three areas he wants to watch closely:
- Whether the number of enforcement actions will continue to grow.
- Whether the overall trend toward cooperation continues at a record high percentage.
- Whether the number of administrative proceedings used to resolve actions continues at a record pace. “I'll definitely be watching to see if that trend continues,” Choi said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllA 'Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don't'-Type Thing: ESG Disclosures and the Prospect of Future Litigation
When It Comes To Recovering on Securities Class Actions, More Money Means More Complexity
Litigators of the Week: The Milbank Team That Made a Bench Trial Nearly a Decade in the Making a 'Not Close' Call for the Judge
Trending Stories
- 1Nelson Mullins, Greenberg Traurig, Jones Day Have Established Themselves As Biggest Outsiders in Atlanta Legal Market
- 2Immunity for Mental Health Care and Coverage for CBD: What's on the Pa. High Court's November Calendar
- 3How to Support Law Firm Profitability: Train Partners Up
- 4Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 5Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250