California Corporate & Securities Law

Yesterday's post again discussed whether the Securities and Exchange Commission exceeded its authority in adopting Rule 21F-17(a), which provides:

In a blog post this morning, Liz Dunshee notes that the Securities and Exchange Commission has recently announced the settlement seven more cases involving Rule 21F-17(a), which provides:

Last week, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced that it had settled charges against a broker-dealer and two investment advisers for impeding their clients from reporting securities law violations to the SEC. According to the SEC, the...

In a recent post, Professor Stephen Bainbridge expounds on the question of whether the President may fire Chairman Gary Gensler.  He concludes:

More than a decade ago, I expressed concern when the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Koss Corporation and one its CEO, Mr. Koss, with filing materially false financial statements after the corporation had discovered that it had been the...

Last year, the California legislature enacted two bills, SB 253 and SB 261 that purport to impose burdensome disclosure mandates on businesses. The legislature did so in spite of obvious constitutional infirmities. It was no surprise that the laws...

A recent paper by four law professors takes a look at risk factor disclosures in Form 10-Qs and 10-Ks filed by 3,000 firms from January 2020 through the end of 2023.  Stephen Choi, Mitu Gulati, Xuan Liu, and Adam Pritchard, Covid-19 Risk Factors and...

Readers may recall that I have penned several posts on the subject whether coal is a mineral for purposes of the Securities and Exchange Commission's resource extraction disclosure rules:

When the Securities and Exchange Commission proposed to adopt a rule a rule requiring issuers to report day-to-day share repurchase data once a quarter and to disclose the reason why the issuer repurchased shares of its own stock, I submitted a ...