Feeds

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

Footnote to one of the 'dumbest moments in business'

Build a business case: developing custom apps

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
Assange™: Hey world, I'M STILL HERE, ignore that Snowden guy
Press conference: ME ME ME ME ME ME ME (cont'd pg 94)
Premier League wants to PURGE ALL FOOTIE GIFs from social media
Not paying Murdoch? You're gonna get a right LEGALLING - thanks to automated software
Caught red-handed: UK cops, PCSOs, specials behaving badly… on social media
No Mr Fuzz, don't ask a crime victim to be your pal on Facebook
Ballmer quits Microsoft board to spend more time with his b-balls
From Clippy to Clippers: Hi, I see you're running an NBA team now ...
Online tat bazaar eBay coughs to YET ANOTHER outage
Web-based flea market struck dumb by size and scale of fail
Kate Bush: Don't make me HAVE CONTACT with your iPHONE
Can't face sea of wobbling fondle implements. What happened to lighters, eh?
Amazon takes swipe at PayPal, Square with card reader for mobes
Etailer plans to undercut rivals with low transaction fee offer
Call of Duty daddy considers launching own movie studio
Activision Blizzard might like quality control of a CoD film
prev story

Whitepapers

5 things you didn’t know about cloud backup
IT departments are embracing cloud backup, but there’s a lot you need to know before choosing a service provider. Learn all the critical things you need to know.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Build a business case: developing custom apps
Learn how to maximize the value of custom applications by accelerating and simplifying their development.
Rethinking backup and recovery in the modern data center
Combining intelligence, operational analytics, and automation to enable efficient, data-driven IT organizations using the HP ABR approach.
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.