Feeds

Morgan Stanley offers $15m to make up for missing emails

Footnote to one of the 'dumbest moments in business'

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

Investment bank Morgan Stanley has offered to pay the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) $15m to settle an investigation by the regulator into an alleged failure by the firm to produce email evidence during a legal dispute.

According to an Annual Report filed by Morgan Stanley with the SEC earlier this month, the investment bank has reached "an agreement in principle" with the enforcement division of the SEC, but the settlement has not yet been presented to the full SEC.

"No assurance can be given that it will be accepted," warns the filing.

If it is accepted, a $15m settlement would be the largest sum ever paid for email retention failures, according to reports.

The firm is also discussing settlement with financial watchdog the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD), although no agreement has been reached.

The investigations relate to the 1998 sale of Coleman Co, owned by billionaire Ronald Perelman, to Sunbeam Corp.

Sunbeam stock formed part of the purchase price, but the stock value fell dramatically just shortly after the sale. Morgan Stanley had advised Sunbeam in the deal and Perelman accused the firm of complicity in an accounting scandal that hid Sunbeam's problems.

The case turned against Morgan Stanley when the firm failed to produce emails and documents sought by Perelman’s lawyers. This annoyed the judge so much that she reversed the burden of proof so that Morgan Stanley was obliged to prove its innocence.

The jury awarded Perelman $1.45bn in damages. Business 2.0 magazine notes in its annual round-up of 'Dumbest moments in business' that Perelman had reportedly offered to settle for $20m.

The Perelman case is now subject to appeal, but regulators were concerned that the failure to produce the documents indicated some breach of federal regulations, and began their own investigations.

Copyright © 2006, OUT-LAW.com

OUT-LAW.COM is part of international law firm Pinsent Masons.

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

More from The Register

next story
Facebook, Apple: LADIES! Why not FREEZE your EGGS? It's on the company!
No biological clockwatching when you work in Silicon Valley
Lords take revenge on REVENGE PORN publishers
Jilted Johns and Jennies with busy fingers face two years inside
Yes, yes, Steve Jobs. Look what I'VE done for you lately – Tim Cook
New iPhone biz baron points to Apple's (his) greatest successes
Happiness economics is bollocks. Oh, UK.gov just adopted it? Er ...
Opportunity doesn't knock; it costs us instead
Facebook pays INFINITELY MORE UK corp tax than in 2012
Thanks for the £3k, Zuck. Doh! you're IN CREDIT. Guess not
Ex-US Navy fighter pilot MIT prof: Drones beat humans - I should know
'Missy' Cummings on UAVs, smartcars and dying from boredom
Sysadmin with EBOLA? Gartner's issued advice to debug your biz
Start hoarding cleaning supplies, analyst firm says, and assume your team will scatter
Edward who? GCHQ boss dodges Snowden topic during last speech
UK spies would rather 'walk' than do 'mass surveillance'
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Why and how to choose the right cloud vendor
The benefits of cloud-based storage in your processes. Eliminate onsite, disk-based backup and archiving in favor of cloud-based data protection.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.