Supreme Court Limits Triple Damages in Fraud Suits; the Ruling Could Hamper Government Efforts to Recover Damages in Bank and Thrift Cases Where Racketeering Is Alleged

By Campbell, Geoffrey A. | American Banker, March 26, 1992 | Go to article overview

Supreme Court Limits Triple Damages in Fraud Suits; the Ruling Could Hamper Government Efforts to Recover Damages in Bank and Thrift Cases Where Racketeering Is Alleged


Campbell, Geoffrey A., American Banker


WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled this week that the company insuring securities investors against fraud cannot recover triple damages in its pursuit of wrongdoing under federal racketeering law.

The ruling, in a case involving the Securities Investor Protection Corp., could hamper government efforts to recover damages in bank and thrift cases. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. has filed a number of racketeering suits alleging securities fraud.

The Supreme Court's unanimous ruling, written by Justice David H. Souter, said plaintiffs must suffer direct harm from securities fraud before being allowed to make use of the triple-damages provision of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

SIPC Harmed Indirectly

The court reasoned that the securities industry insurer suffered only indirect harm because its losses in Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corp. were contingent on the collapse of two broker dealers, which went out of business after alleged stock manipulation.

But in a 5-to-4 split, the court declined to rule on whether plaintiffs must be buyers or sellers of securities in order to suffer direct harm and, thus, to be authorized to assert claims under the federal racketeering law.

Four justices said plaintiffs should not have to be buyers or sellers in order to sue. But while the court's majority did not rule on the issue directly, they strongly hinted their commitment to the buyer-seller rule.

Opening a Can of Worms

"Allowing suits by those injured only indirectly would open the door to massive and complex damages litigation, which would not only burden the courts but also undermine the effectiveness of treble-damages suits," Justice Souter wrote.

He said that allowing people who do not buy securities to sue would require courts to determine how much a plaintiff suffered because of fraud, as opposed to "poor business practices" or failure to anticipate market movements - a difficult proposition.

Under Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5, sanctioned by the high court in a 1975 case, plaintiffs may sue for relief from fraud only if they bought or sold securities. The issue before the court in the current case was whether that rule applies when plaintiffs allege that securities fraud was accomplished through a "pattern of racketeering activity. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Supreme Court Limits Triple Damages in Fraud Suits; the Ruling Could Hamper Government Efforts to Recover Damages in Bank and Thrift Cases Where Racketeering Is Alleged
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.