Articles Posted in Financial Firms

There’s a very good piece in the Financial Times today about Goldman Sachs by Francesco Guerrera and Tom Braithwaite. It’s available online at http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1eb0ea18-d497-11de-a935-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1

The authors explain how competitive Goldman is and how profits and risk management drive the firm. They go on to explain how difficult it will be for Goldman to handle the backlash of paying out huge bonuses in an environment of double digit unemployment rates.

For a long time, Goldman was by far the gold standard of investment firms. Much of the financial crisis stems from every other firm trying to be like Goldman and making huge, leveraged bets with proprietary capital. The difference has been that Goldman has always one stop ahead of the rest of the Street. Partly due to the “market color” it receives as an investment bank, prime broker, clearing firm, counter party, and trader, Goldman somehow is nimble enough to know when to stop on a dime and bet the other way. Merrill, Citi, Morgan and the rest could never do that. Merrill, especially, was three steps behind and was late to the CDO game just like it was late to the prop trading game and the internet craze.

Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. filed a lawsuit against Barclays Capital in New York federal court alleging the British bank took control of excess assets in collusion with Lehman executives when it bought its U.S. brokerage business in 2008. The Lehman bankruptcy is the largest U.S. bankruptcy in history. The claim alleges that Barclays Capital received a $8.2 billion “windfall profit” due to an undisclosed $5 billion discount on the sale of certain securities. The complaint alleges, “The windfall to Barclays was not disclosed to the Court, the Lehman Boards or Lehman’s lawyers so as to allow the transfer to Barclays of billions of dollars in excess assets, without consideration, in a manner designed to avoid judicial, corporate and creditor oversight.”

Bankruptcy litigation is booming amidst the flood of major bankruptcies filed in the U.S. We have seen more and more battles between bankruptcy trustees and receivers against the major worldwide banks. Since many of these cases are filed by and defended by law firms which often represent bulge bracket investment banks and broker dealers, it will be interesting to see how many international law firms will be conflicted out of handling such cases.

In the Lehman v. Barclays case, Jones Day represents the Debtor, Lehman in the Barclays matter. Weil, Gotshal & Manges, is Lehman’s lead bankruptcy counsel, but is not handling the Barclays litigation. Boies, Schiller & Flexner is representing Barclays. David Boies’ firm’s website states, “We have been described by The Wall Street Journal as a “national litigation power–house” and by the National Law Journal as “unafraid to venture into controversial” and “high risk” matters.” This certainly qualifies.

The SEC announced that it will continue to pursue its civil enforcement case against former Bear Stearns High Grade Fund portfolio managers Ralph Cioffi and Matthew Tannin, after the recent acquittal of criminal charges against Messrs. Cioffi and Tannin. According to recent news reports, Robert Khuzami, head of enforcement at the SEC, told Reuters TV, “We filed a case based on the evidence from our investigation.” Mr. Khuzami added, “we have a different standard of proof.”

The SEC’s complaint (available on its website) is indeed far more broad than the charges lodged by the U.S. Attorneys’ Office in Brooklyn. It also reaches all of the way back to the beginning of the High Grade Fund’s existence as opposed to just the late 2006, early 2007 time period the prosecutors focused on. The prosecutors’ standard of proof of “beyond a reasonable doubt” is much stiffer than the SEC’s and civil litigants’ standard of “by a preponderance of evidence.” In order for Messrs. Cioffi and Tannin to re-enter the securities industry, they will have to defend the SEC action as well.

A former president of a Memphis gas company won a $51,000 arbitration award against Morgan Keegan & Co. related to the Morgan Keegan bond funds. It was approximately 64% of the investor’s out of pocket losses. This is just another in a string of victories by public customers against Morgan Keegan related to the funds.

According to news reports, the statement of claim alleged that the funds were not managed conservatively and that Morgan Keegan misrepresented their volatility. Jim Kelsoe, the funds manager allegedly made numerous representations to the investor that the RMK funds were safe.

Morgan Keegan received a Wells notice in July from the SEC and the tide has seemingly changed in the arbitration forum. Our firm represent investors with RMK claims. According to a Morgan Keegan spokesman, despite the loss, Morgan Keegan will continue a vigorous defense of all claims. We shall see.

Charles Schwab acknowledged that the SEC served it with a Wells Notice related to its sale of

two funds, the YieldPlus Fund and Total Bond Market Fund. A Wells Notice advises the firm that the SEC staff intends to recommend civil charges for possible securities violations.

The additional heat from the SEC may force Schwab to think about settling the many pending FINRA arbitrations against the firm. There is also a pending class action which was certified by a federal court in California in August. The litigation bills are growing.

The Charles Schwab YieldPlus Fund class action suit has generated some serious questions for investors to consider. The U.S. District Court in San Francisco issued a Notice of Pendency to class members which includes important information about how to opt out as a class member. Opt out requests must be received by the claims administrator no later than Monday, December 28, 2009. Investors therefore have to decide whether they intend to file individual arbitration claims against Schwab or whether they would like to remain in the class action. As we wrote about last week, investors around the country have recently won a string of FINRA arbitrations against Schwab based upon allegations that the Fund was over concentrated in mortgage backed securities.

Opening statements in the criminal trial of Ralph Cioffi and Matthew Tannin, the former portfolio managers for the Bear Stearns High Grade Funds, start today in federal court in Brooklyn, NY. The High Grade Funds imploded in 2007 causing $1.4 billion in investor losses. Prosecutors have charged Cioffi and Tannin with securities fraud and Cioffi with insider trading. The media coverage so far has focused almost exclusively on emails sent by Cioffi and Tannin regarding their personal thoughts about the Funds. The government alleges that Cioffi and Tannin thought the Funds were in serious trouble but then told investors on conference calls that everything was fine. While emails are often sexy and this is an important part of the case, the defense will likely argue that the email quotes were taken out of context and that the portfolio managers were simply analyzing the prospects of the Funds and were not intentionally lying to investors.

The press has not focused much on two just as important aspects of the prosecution’s case which should be easier to prove. First, according to the prosecutors, on the investor conference calls, the managers told investors that there was a lesser amount of investor redemptions in the High Grade Funds than there actually were. Here, the government can argue that Cioffi and Tannin clearly knew how much in redemptions were put in by investors yet they told investors a different number so investors wouldn’t run for the exits. The redemption amounts are undisputed facts and much less susceptible to defense spinning.

Second, the prosecutors allege that Cioffi and Tannin used their personal investments in the Funds as part of their pitch to investors, to invest in, and stay invested in the Funds. In early 2007, the government alleges Tannin told investors he was adding to his position. Also, Cioffi redeemed $2 million of his own personal monies in 2007 and did not notify investors. The government can argue that Tannin lied to investors about his own personal investments in order to keep them in the Funds. Also, that Cioffi, because he used his own personal investments in the Funds as a marketing tool, wilfully omitted his $2 million personal redemption in order to induce investors to stay in the Funds. The longer the Funds were alive, the better chance Cioffi and Tannin could continue to reap their multi million dollar annual bonuses.

Matthew Tannin, the former Bear Stearns High Grade Fund portfolio manager, kept a personal diary of e-mails to himself in a G-Mail account. The U.S. Attorney’s Office received the e-mails after using a search warrant on Google. According to e-mails released by prosecutors yesterday, Tannin wrote in as early as November 2006 that the funds “could blow up”. U.S. District Judge Frederic Block said at a hearing that he will likely allow prosecutors to introduce the newly obtained e-mails as evidence at Tannin’s trial. The U.S. Attorney’s Office apparently has not finished reviewing all of the e-mails.

These e-mails could be extremely helpful in the government’s case against Tannin. His trial is set for Oct. 13. The prosecutors can use Tannin’s e-mails to show his knowledge and intent that Tannin and a co-defendant Ralph Cioffi misled clients about the funds.

The e-mails may also be helpful for the many investors who have pending securities arbitration cases against Bear Stearns (our firm has multiple, significant arbitrations pending at FINRA). Since the notebook and Tablet PC of Cioffi and Tannin have gone missing, Tannin’s newly discovered personal e-mail diary may be investors only chance to look into Tannin’s thoughts regarding the funds.

Charles Schwab has been trying most of the many arbitration cases filed against it related to the Charles Schwab HighYield Plus fund. Last month, a Los Angeles based Finra panel awarded what appears to be almost 100% of an investor’s losses (about $75,000) in the fund, plus expert witness fees and all of the arbitrators compensation. The case is Chang v. Charles Schwab (Finra case number 08-02417) and is available on Finra’s website. This is one of a string of recent losses in the HighYield Plus fund cases based upon allegations that the fund was overconcentrated in mortgage backed securities. It will be interesting to see if Schwab starts settling more of these cases.

The Bear Stearns High Grade Funds blew up in the early summer of 2007, precipitating the the credit crisis around the world. On October 13, 2009, in federal court in Brooklyn, NY, Ralph Cioffi and Matthew Tannin, the portfolio managers of the High Grade Funds, will be facing criminal trial on fraud and conspiracy charges. Cioffi has also been charged with insider trading. This is the first major criminal trial stemming from the subprime mortgage era. It will be closely watched around the world. The U.S. Attorneys’ Office of the Eastern District of New York recently won a huge trial against former Credit Suisse broker Eric Butler who was convicted of fraudulently selling millions of dollars of auction rate securities. The Brooklyn jury convicted Butler of conspiracy to commit securities fraud, securities fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud and he faces a maximum sentence of 45 years in prison. A major battle is being fought over whether the prosecutors can introduce evidence that a Tablet PC and a notebook of Cioffi and Tannin disappeared and about Cioffi’s lavish lifestyle.

Contact Information