SEC v. Citigroup Global Markets, Inc. Case No. 11 Civ 7387 (S.D.N.Y.): The Commission appealed the determination by District Court Judge Rakoff to not approve the proposed settlement in this case. The underlying action is the Commission’s latest market crisis case. Judge Rakoff declined to approve the proposed settlement noting that he did not have sufficient facts on which to evaluate the matter. While the Court was critical in its order regarding the fact that the settlement was based on neither admitting nor denying the allegations in the complaint, central to the Court’s conclusion was its view that there was a fundamental mismatch between the allegations of the complaint which alleged an intentional fraud and its charging sections which were based on negligence and the proposed settlement which was based on a small fine when viewed in the context of similar cases without offering any explanation for the apparent mismatch. In proceedings before Judge Rakoff the Commission chose not to offer an explanation. Rather, it argued essentially that the Court had a limited role and should defer to the decision of the agency.
Register Now As you are not an existing subscriber please register for your free daily legal newsfeed service.Register
If you have any questions about the service please contact email@example.com or call Lexology Customer Services on +44 20 7234 0606.
Citigroup global marks, inc
- Dorsey & Whitney LLP
- Nicholas Burkill, Charlotte Gilbert, Nick Akerman, Joshua Colangelo-Bryan, Sumiko Soekawa and Thomas O. Gorman
- December 22 2011
If you are interested in submitting an article to Lexology, please contact Andrew Teague at firstname.lastname@example.org.
“I enjoy the CLANZ newsstand and find it highly relevant to my job. I definitely have forwarded various articles to my colleagues on occasion where there is a point of general interest, particularly employment or IT law. I...
“I enjoy the CLANZ newsstand and find it highly relevant to my job. I definitely have forwarded various articles to my colleagues on occasion where there is a point of general interest, particularly employment or IT law. I really appreciate the service, it's a quick way for me to keep up to date in a way I wouldn't otherwise have time to.”