Keith Paul Bishop

Keith Paul Bishop

Keith Bishop works with privately-held and publicly-traded companies on federal and state corporate and securities transactions, compliance, and governance matters. He is highly-regarded for his in-depth knowledge of the distinctive corporate and regulatory requirements faced by corporations in the state of California. While many law firms have a great deal of expertise in federal or Delaware corporate law, Keith’s specific focus on California corporate and securities law is uncommon. A former California state regulator of securities and financial institutions, Keith has decades of experience navigating the regulatory-intensive state’s rules. For companies with substantial operations in California but incorporated elsewhere, Keith is an exceptional resource. He is frequently called in to help with issues arising under California’s “blue sky” and lender laws. An avid writer, Keith’s blog, www.calcorporatelaw.com, covers a diverse collection of California corporate and securities law issues and has served as a valued resource for other attorneys, business executives, judges, and media, nationwide.

Recent Posts

NY District Court Finds That Same Plaintiff In ARS Case Has No California Securities Law Claims

In this Friday the 13th post, I wrote about The Anschutz Corporation's (TAC) success in having California law apply to its negligent representation claims against the defendant New York rating agencies. Thus, it may come as a surprise to learn that...

Commissioner Announces Action To Alleviate Exempt Adviser Uncertainty

This afternoon, Commissioner Preston DuFauchard released this letter regarding the upcoming demise of the federal private adviser exemption (Section 203(b)(3) of the Investment Adviser Act of 1940). The Commissioner's letter is in response to...

Court Applies California Common Law To New York Rating Agencies

In another auction rate securities (ARS) case, The Anschutz Corporation (TAC) brought suit against several rating agencies alleging negligent misrepresentation.  The Anschutz Corp. v. Merrill Lynch & Co., Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) P96,258 (N.D. Cal....

Rule 134 And Suitability Disclosure

Recently, I came across the following Compliance and Disclosure Interpretation (C&DI) issued by the Division of Corporation Finance at the Securities and Exchange Commission:

CalPERS Focus List - "Oh, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors"

As I reported in this post from last November, the California Public Employees Retirement System has reworked its Focus List program.  According to this flow chart published by CalPERS, the staff should have now completed its review of the top 500...

Is Privity Required Or Not Required Under Section 25500?

California Corporations Code Section 25400 lists a variety of acts that are considered to manipulate the price of securities. Section 25400 was modeled on Section 9(a) - (e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Although Section 25400 declares...

A Question That You May Want To Add To Your Investor Suitability Questionnaire

Issuers typically use investor suitability questionnaires to elicit information from potential investors in order to substantiate exemptions under federal and/or state securities laws. For example, issuers will often ask detailed questions about a...

California Broker-Dealer Safe Harbor Rule Approved

In People v. Cole, 156 Cal. App. 4th 452 (2007), a California Court of Appeal appeared to reach the surprising conclusion that corporate officers and directors of issuers are required to be licensed as broker-dealers unless they receive a commission...

But Different Folk Have Different Views

Yesterday, I pointed out several ambiguities in Corporations Code Section 701 and offered some alternative interpretations.  Today, I heard from one reader who suggested some additional interpretations.