• Home
  • News
  • Experts See Only Slight Risk for Law Firms in BofA Case, Despite Judge’s Ire

Legal Ethics

Experts See Only Slight Risk for Law Firms in BofA Case, Despite Judge’s Ire

Posted Sep 16, 2009 7:34 AM CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss

U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff’s refusal to approve a $33 million settlement between Bank of America and the Securities and Exchange Commission has put two law firms into the spotlight.

The firms are Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, which represented Bank of America, and Shearman & Sterling, representing takeover target Merrill Lynch, the Wall Street Journal (sub. req.) reports. The proposed deal would have settled claims that Bank of America failed to disclose plans to pay bonuses to Merrill executives before acquiring the company.

On Monday, Rakoff said it was unfair to punish shareholders with a $33 million settlement when they were the ones injured. He noted that the SEC contends misleading proxy statements were apparently prepared by lawyers, and wondered why no penalties were sought against them.

The controversy has pushed the firms “out from the traditional role of behind-the-scenes advisers to the limelight of center stage,” the story says.

“Legal observers said there is a risk, though slight, that the firms could become defendants in the case or face a separate claim by the SEC that the lawyers violated professional ethics,” according to the article. Former SEC chairman David Ruder told the newspaper that the SEC is usually reluctant to focus on lawyer advisers because it wants to encourage legal advice, and prefers instead to focus on conduct by corporate executives.

Meanwhile, a separate Wall Street Journal story reports that Rakoff’s objections are likely to bring more scrutiny to SEC settlements, used to resolve an estimated 90 percent or more of its investigations.

Wayne State University law professor Peter Henning said the ruling could spur other federal judges to question SEC settlements.

Comments

1.

B. McLeod
Sep 16, 2009 7:42 AM CST

Not even the judge can actually make SEC do its job.

Flag this comment

2.

Esq.
Sep 16, 2009 11:09 AM CST

I would like to see the lawyers made an example of.  It’s about time we start holding executives AND their advisors accountable.

Flag this comment

3.

causus
Sep 16, 2009 11:38 AM CST

Of course once the attorneys are brought in and their advice becomes an issue, if a waiver of the attorney/client privilege ensues, there may be some bean spilling about the nature of the assignment given to the attorneys by the institutions.Such a waiver could occur if the attorneys are parties and the institutions defend on the theory of advice of counsel.

Flag this comment

4.

tim
Sep 16, 2009 2:06 PM CST

the law firm should have to pay the 33 million dollar fine.  shareholders should get screwed because a lawyer messed up.

Flag this comment

5.

AboveBoard
Sep 16, 2009 2:44 PM CST

Somehow we have to step back and acknowledge the big picture. Whether or not the shareholders had knowledge or not knowledge of the bonuses, the bigger question will be, how much will they lose out and how much will employees and many others lose out if this heavy handed governmental approach keeps going? Fine them and move on. Lessons learned it is time to rebuild this economy.

Flag this comment

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting has expired on this post.