On March 28, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) held that it was legal under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (1940 Act) for a closed-end fund to use a shareholder rights plan...more
4/1/2025
/ Board of Directors ,
Corporate Governance ,
Hedge Funds ,
Investment Company Act of 1940 ,
Investment Funds ,
Investment Management ,
Poison Pill ,
Securities Litigation ,
Securities Regulation ,
Shareholder Activism ,
Shareholder Rights
On December 5, 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) granted summary judgment in favor of a group of plaintiffs led by Saba Capital Management, L.P. in its case challenging a number of...more
Closed-End Fund Activism Update -
Activist investors continue to take large positions in closed-end funds and engage in disruptive activity that may be harmful to long-term shareholders of retail closed-end funds. This...more
8/8/2023
/ Board of Directors ,
Broker-Dealer ,
Closed-End Funds ,
Compliance ,
Corporate Governance ,
Cryptoassets ,
Disclosure Requirements ,
Enforcement Actions ,
Investment Adviser ,
Libor ,
Liquidity Risk Management Rule ,
Marketing ,
Regulation Best Interest ,
Regulatory Agenda ,
Required Forms ,
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) ,
Shareholder Activism
SEC Rules and Amendments -
Liquidity Rule Amendments: Interval Funds to the Rescue?
On November 2, 2022, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) voted to propose significant amendments to Rule 22e-4 under the...more
4/14/2023
/ Broker-Dealer ,
Comment Period ,
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) ,
Custody Rule ,
Customer Information ,
Cybersecurity ,
Investment Adviser ,
Investment Funds ,
Investment Management ,
Investors ,
Popular ,
Proposed Amendments ,
Proposed Regulation ,
Registered Investment Advisors ,
Risk Management ,
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
In this issue, we cover regulatory developments impacting the investment management sector, including updates on closed-end fund activism and various new and revised SEC rules....more
3/1/2023
/ Activist Investors ,
Advertising ,
Bylaws ,
Corporate Governance ,
Disclosure Requirements ,
Enforcement ,
Executive Compensation ,
Investment ,
Investment Adviser ,
Liquidity Management ,
Open-Ended Fund Companies (OFCs) ,
Outsourcing ,
Popular ,
Proposed Regulation ,
Proposed Rules ,
Proxy Voting ,
Regulatory Agenda ,
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) ,
Securities Regulation
On July 31, 2019, Judge George H. Wu of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California released tentative findings of fact and conclusions of law dismissing an excessive fee claim brought under Section 36(b)...more
8/9/2019
/ Board of Trustees ,
Dismissals ,
Excessive Fees ,
Gartenberg Factors ,
Investment Adviser ,
Investment Company Act of 1940 ,
Investment Management ,
Judicial Deference ,
Reverse Manager of Managers Theory ,
Section 36(b) ,
Third-Party Service Provider
In an opinion unsealed on July 3, 2019, Judge Laura Taylor Swain of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted summary judgment to a mutual fund adviser and dismissed an excessive fee claim brought...more
7/15/2019
/ Arms Length Transactions ,
Board of Directors ,
Dismissals ,
Excessive Fees ,
Financial Adviser ,
Investment Adviser ,
Investment Company Act of 1940 ,
Mutual Funds ,
Retail Investors ,
Section 36(b) ,
Summary Judgment
Following an eight-day bench trial, Judge Freda L. Wolfson of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey ruled in favor of certain subsidiaries of BlackRock, Inc. on $1.55 billion in claims brought under Section...more
With the first-filed cases at or near completion, the results are not looking good for the plaintiffs in the latest wave of mutual fund fee litigation. Defendants prevailed after trial in one of those cases and achieved...more