Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
SEC Moves Away From “Neither Admit Nor Deny" Settlement Policy: What’s Next?
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: July 29, 2013
Key Contacts
Back
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently announced changes to its long-standing practice of settling cases on a “neither admit not deny basis.”
Under the terms of the SEC’s policy, defendants are not required to admit to the SEC’s allegations of wrongdoing in settlement agreements and consent judgments. However, they are also not allowed to deny the factual allegations that form the basis of the agency’s complaint.
Facing pressure to hold individuals and firms accountable for their misdeeds in the wake of the financial crisis, new SEC Chair Mary Jo White recently announced, “There may be particular individuals or institutions where it is very important it be a matter of public record that they acknowledge their wrongdoing, and if not you go to trial.”
While there has been no official policy announced, an internal SEC email to Enforcement Division staff further explained that while the SEC will continue to employ no-admit-no-deny settlements to resolve cases, “there may be certain cases where heightened accountability or acceptance of responsibility through the defendant’s admission of misconduct may be appropriate, even if it does not allow us to achieve a prompt resolution.”
The correspondence noted that the new admissions requirement would be limited to certain types of cases, including:
- Misconduct that harmed large numbers of investors or placed investors or the market at risk of potentially serious harm;
- Where admissions might safeguard against risks posed by the defendant to the investing public, particularly when the defendant engaged in egregious intentional misconduct; or
- When the defendant engaged in unlawful obstruction of the Commission’s investigative processes.
The new policy will undoubtedly have an impact on the SEC’s enforcement record. As highlighted in SEC testimony defending the policy in 2012, “There is little dispute that if ‘neither-admit-nor-deny’ settlements were eliminated, and cases could be resolved only if the defendant admitted the facts constituting the violation, or was found liable by a court or jury, there would be far fewer settlements, and much greater delay in resolving matters and bringing relief to harmed investors.”
Admissions can be particularly damning for regulated entities. For instance, an admission could preclude an individual or firm from challenging liability in a subsequent civil lawsuit. Moreover, an admission could also be used to prove criminal liability for the same violation. Given the risks, defendants are highly unlikely to settle, without some assurances that their admissions will not come back to haunt them.
If you have any questions about the new SEC policy or would like to discuss the legal issues involved, please contact me, Jay Surgent, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
- Locations: New York City, Red Bank, NJ, Washington, D.C., Little Falls, NJ
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Related Posts
See all
What Are FIRPTA Withholding Requirements?
If you purchase real property from a foreign person or entity, you may be required to withhold taxes from your payment to the seller under the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act (FIRPTA). The federal tax law is designed to ensure that foreign sellers pay any applicable capital gains tax on profits realized from […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
SEC Moves Away From “Neither Admit Nor Deny" Settlement Policy: What’s Next?
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently announced changes to its long-standing practice of settling cases on a “neither admit not deny basis.”
Under the terms of the SEC’s policy, defendants are not required to admit to the SEC’s allegations of wrongdoing in settlement agreements and consent judgments. However, they are also not allowed to deny the factual allegations that form the basis of the agency’s complaint.
Facing pressure to hold individuals and firms accountable for their misdeeds in the wake of the financial crisis, new SEC Chair Mary Jo White recently announced, “There may be particular individuals or institutions where it is very important it be a matter of public record that they acknowledge their wrongdoing, and if not you go to trial.”
While there has been no official policy announced, an internal SEC email to Enforcement Division staff further explained that while the SEC will continue to employ no-admit-no-deny settlements to resolve cases, “there may be certain cases where heightened accountability or acceptance of responsibility through the defendant’s admission of misconduct may be appropriate, even if it does not allow us to achieve a prompt resolution.”
The correspondence noted that the new admissions requirement would be limited to certain types of cases, including:
- Misconduct that harmed large numbers of investors or placed investors or the market at risk of potentially serious harm;
- Where admissions might safeguard against risks posed by the defendant to the investing public, particularly when the defendant engaged in egregious intentional misconduct; or
- When the defendant engaged in unlawful obstruction of the Commission’s investigative processes.
The new policy will undoubtedly have an impact on the SEC’s enforcement record. As highlighted in SEC testimony defending the policy in 2012, “There is little dispute that if ‘neither-admit-nor-deny’ settlements were eliminated, and cases could be resolved only if the defendant admitted the facts constituting the violation, or was found liable by a court or jury, there would be far fewer settlements, and much greater delay in resolving matters and bringing relief to harmed investors.”
Admissions can be particularly damning for regulated entities. For instance, an admission could preclude an individual or firm from challenging liability in a subsequent civil lawsuit. Moreover, an admission could also be used to prove criminal liability for the same violation. Given the risks, defendants are highly unlikely to settle, without some assurances that their admissions will not come back to haunt them.
If you have any questions about the new SEC policy or would like to discuss the legal issues involved, please contact me, Jay Surgent, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.