Feeds

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

Footnote to one of the 'dumbest moments in business'

Internet Security Threat Report 2014

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.

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

More from The Register

next story
WHY did Sunday Mirror stoop to slurping selfies for smut sting?
Tabloid splashes, MP resigns - but there's a BIG copyright issue here
Spies, avert eyes! Tim Berners-Lee demands a UK digital bill of rights
Lobbies tetchy MPs 'to end indiscriminate online surveillance'
How the FLAC do I tell MP3s from lossless audio?
Can you hear the difference? Can anyone?
Google hits back at 'Dear Rupert' over search dominance claims
Choc Factory sniffs: 'We're not pirate-lovers - also, you publish The Sun'
While you queued for an iPhone 6, Apple's Cook sold shares worth $35m
Right before the stock took a 3.8% dive amid bent and broken mobe drama
Inequality increasing? BOLLOCKS! You heard me: 'Screw the 1%'
There's morality and then there's economics ...
prev story

Whitepapers

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk
A single remote control platform for user support is be key to providing an efficient helpdesk. Retain full control over the way in which screen and keystroke data is transmitted.
Intelligent flash storage arrays
Tegile Intelligent Storage Arrays with IntelliFlash helps IT boost storage utilization and effciency while delivering unmatched storage savings and performance.
Beginner's guide to SSL certificates
De-mystify the technology involved and give you the information you need to make the best decision when considering your online security options.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.
Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops
Balancing user privacy and privileged access, in accordance with compliance frameworks and legislation. Evaluating any potential remote control choice.