LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 90
0 members and 90 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 4,499, 10-26-2015 at 07:55 AM.
Thread: SOX (not socks)
View Single Post
Old 08-14-2003, 10:59 AM   #4
baltassoc
Caustically Optimistic
 
baltassoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The City That Reads
Posts: 2,384
SOX

Thanks for the ACCA reference. I was aware of the organization but hadn't thought to look there for information.

Here's a link to the Commissions regulations for reference:

http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-8185.htm

What worries me is that civil penalties are impose directly on the attorney for failing to comply, and such investigations are always done with perfect hindsight. If I make a decision as to whether something is okay that the SEC disagrees with, does anyone think the SEC is going to admit my position was nonetheless reasonable?

Fortunately, I rarely do anything that touches an SEC filing either, but one never knows. It seems to be an open question whether it is sufficient to have worked on a part of a document to be responsible for the entire document (for example, drafting a summary of a piece of litigation one is supervising to be included in a 10-Q). Even if one were to prevail on the questions, the attorneys fees alone to mount a defense would be ruinous if they had to be paid for out of the attorney-defendant's pocket. Hence the question about insurance and/or indemnification. I think insurance makes more sense, because the SEC (or a subsequent board) may take the position that indemnification is not allowed.

Wonk: assuming you do such work, or might in that future, how comfortable are you answering securitieswonk's questions about the structure of deals you've reviewed?

Just some thoughts.
baltassoc is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:39 PM.