• Disparities Seen in Federal Securities Fraud Sentences, New York Law Journal
    by: Steven D. Feldman | New York Law Journal (Subscription Required) | (03/20/2009)

    In every criminal case, the defendant must make a critical decision: go to trial or plead guilty. A slew of factors go into that decision. Three questions loom largest: how likely will the defense prevail at trial, what sentence do we anticipate if the defendant pleads guilty, and what is the likely sentence if the defendant is found guilty after trial? Here, we will concentrate on the latter two questions, which touch on the vagaries of sentences in securities fraud cases in the post-guidelines world.

  • Securities law practitioners should take note of a recent decision by United States District Judge Gerard E. Lynch, which marks the first use of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s new anti-fraud rules promulgated under the Investment Adviser Act.

  • “Capital Markets - Trading Issues for the Global Firm” Panel, SIFMA Compliance and Legal Division New York Fall Compliance Seminar.

  • “Internal Compliance Examinations (Large Firms)” Panel, NSCP 2008 National Membership Meeting, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

  • Fraud in Markup: An Unusual SEC Decision
    by: Howard L. Kramer | The Review of Securities & Commodities Regulation (Subscription Required) | (09/03/2008)

    "Fraud in Markup: An Unusual SEC Decision," The Review of Securities & Commodities Regulation.

  • (co-authored with Timothy H. Irons) - The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) introduced new statewide goals for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The following year, Senator Robert Dutton’s lesser-known GHG bill SB 97 was passed. SB 97 does two things -- it directs the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop guidelines for reducing or eliminating GHG emissions and protects infrastructure projects funded by voter-approved bonds from legal attack based on noncompliance with AB 32. Although the AB 32 exemption provided by SB 97 expires Jan. 1, 2010, the guidelines prepared by OPR and adopted by the state Resources Agency may pose significant, long-lasting changes to the environmental review and approval of projects throughout California.