Morgan Stanley settles email lawsuit
NEW YORK – US investment bank Morgan Stanley has settled a lawsuit with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in which the regulator alleged that the firm failed to produce "tens of thousands of emails" during the SEC's investigation into initial public offerings and research analysts from December 11, 2000 through July 2005.
The SEC said Morgan Stanley "did not diligently search for back-up tapes containing responsive emails until 2005. Morgan Stanley also failed to produce responsive emails because it over-wrote back-up tapes." The complaint also alleges that the firm "made numerous misstatements regarding the status and completeness of its productions; the unavailability of certain documents; and its efforts to preserve requested email." The regulator charged Morgan Stanley with violating the provisions of the federal securities laws requiring it, as a regulated broker-dealer, to produce its records and documents in a timely fashion to the regulator.
The investment bank settled the suit without admitting or denying the allegations. It has also consented to a permanent injunction and payment of a $15 million civil penalty, $5 million of which will be paid to NASD and the New York Stock Exchange in separate related proceedings. The firm has also agreed to adopt and implement policies, procedures and training focused on the preservation and production of email communications.
Antonia Chion, associate director of the SEC's division of enforcement, said "Morgan Stanley's repeated production failures and misstatements prejudiced two major investigations. This settlement will require Morgan Stanley to put into place reforms to prevent similar misconduct from recurring."
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Hong Kong derivatives regime could drive more offshore booking
Industry warns new capital requirements for securities firms are higher than other jurisdictions
Will Iosco’s guidance solve pre-hedging puzzle?
Buy-siders doubt consent requirement will remove long-standing concerns
Responsible AI is about payoffs as much as principles
How one firm cut loan processing times and improved fraud detection without compromising on governance
Could one-off loan losses at US regional banks become systemic?
Investors bet Zions, Western Alliance are isolated problems, but credit risk managers are nervous
SEC poised to approve expansion of CME-FICC cross-margining
Agency’s new division heads moving swiftly on applications related to US Treasury clearing
ECB bank supervisors want top-down stress test that bites
Proposal would simplify capital structure with something similar to US stress capital buffer
Clearing houses warn Esma margin rules will stifle innovation
Changes in model confidence levels could still trip supervisory threshold even after relaxation in final RTS
BlackRock, Citadel Securities, Nasdaq mull tokenised equities’ impact on regulations
An SEC panel recently debated the ramifications of a future with tokenised equities