Letter to the SEC urging them to file an amicus brief in the case of J. & W. Seligman & Co. Incorporated v. Eliot Spitzer in order to articulate the scope of state regulators’ authority under the ICA and the National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996 (NSMIA)to investigate and litigate advisory fee issues.
Click “Download PDF” to view the full report
REPORT
Honorable Christopher Cox
Chairman
Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20549-2001
Dear Chairman Cox,
The Committee on Investment Management Regulation of The Association of the Bar of the City of New York is composed of lawyers with diverse perspectives on investment management issues, including members of law firms, and counsel to financial services firms, investment company complexes and investment advisers. A list of our current members is enclosed.
We are writing to urge the Commission to file a brief amicus curiae in a case pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entitled J. W. Seligman & Co. Incorporated v. Eliot Spitzer, No. 05 Civ. 7781 (S.D.N.Y. filed Sept. 6, 2005) (“Seligman“).
Plaintiff in Seligman is an investment advisor registered with the Commission pursuant to the Investment Advisors Act of 1940. Defendant Spitzer is the Attorney General for the State of New York (“NYAG”). The NYAG, together with the Commission, commented an investigation of Seligman in February 2004 arising from alleged frequent trading by certain customers in certain mutual funds managed by Seligman. (Compl. 9.) In its Complaint, Seligman seeks to enjoin the NYAG from investigating or requesting information concerning allegedly excessive advisory fees paid to Seligman or otherwise exercising powers delegated by Congress to the Commission under Section 36(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“ICA”). (A copy of the Seligman complaint is enclosed.)
