Martin Act

The Empire

Bank of NY Mellon settles Martin Act suit for $1.3 million

Thursday, December 22, 2011

Remember yesterday when we were talking about the Martin Act and how it's a huge tool for the AG's office to recoup funds from malfeasant banks? Well, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's office just announced a claw back from Bank of New York Mellon for "manipulative trading of auction rate securities." The bank settled with the AG's office and will pay $1.3 million as part of the deal.

And now Schneiderman gets to sound like a financial Robocop:

"Today’s announcement sends a clear message that the manipulative trading of auction rate securities in New York will not be tolerated under any circumstances," Attorney General Schneiderman said. "My office will continue to protect the integrity of NY’s global financial markets at all costs."

Read More


The Empire

State's highest court delivers half of Assemblyman Lancman's Martin Act reform bill

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

In a ruling by the state’s highest court on December 20th, a major disagreement over one of the biggest tools the state’s Attorney General has in regulating Wall Street. In a unanimous decision, the Court of Appeals ruled that New York’s Martin Law didn’t preempt private individuals from going after Wall Street firms that mismanaged or defrauded investors.

In a statement, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's office called the decision "an important recognition that private lawsuits brought by harmed investors are compatible with our office's public enforcement role under the Martin Act."

The New York Law Review has a detailed (and technical) breakdown of the Martin Law’s and the history of this issue.

But for those not plugged into the securities industry, the Martins Law is a Depression Era law unique to New York, that allows the state’s Attorney General broad powers to go after firms that swindled investors. In light of the 2007 Wall Street-created meltdown of the economy, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has taken the baton passed down from former AG Eliot Spitzer to use the previously unused law to go after big Wall Street firms.

The Court of Appeals decision settles a disagreement over how the Martin Act impacts private investors’ attempts to recoup funds they believe were inappropriately lost. Some state and federal courts had ruled that the act preempts investors from seeking damages because the facts of the case could be used by the Attorney General to make his or her own case.

Now, the two are separated and can happen concurrently: the Attorney General’s office can sue a firm for fraud and investors can also try to get back some of the money they invested, using the same facts to build their separate cases. No longer does the AG’s office have sole domain over pursuing firms thanks to the Martin Act.

This is partly what Queens Assemblyman Rory Lancman has been pushing for with a bi-partisan bill he has cosponsored with State Senator Tom Libous of Binghamton.

Read More