A Grounded Theory Analysis of Civil and Administrative Cases Pursued by the Security and Exchange Commission

Abstract

In the midst of the Great Depression, the U.S. government created the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to help control questionable business practices and prevent future economic crises. The SEC remains responsible for the administration of securities laws and enforcement actions against violators but has increasingly gained enforcement capacities over its lifespan. This research uses a grounded theory approach to explore themes across the way the SEC proceedings against detected. Publicly available litigation releases available through the agency’s website are used. Overall, the SEC is observed to operate in a generally predictable and equitable manner in which most of those who are charged are ultimately sanctioned in some way. Particularly interesting interactions were observed between entities and sanctioning outcomes.¹

Keywords

white-collar crime SEC litigation releases administrative proceedings

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Angulski

Gerber

(2020). The drugs may be synthetic but the consequences are not: Analysis of synthetic cannabinoid user accounts. Deviant Behavior, 41(4), 512–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2019.1572097

Bowen

G. A.

(2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/qrj0902027

Bregant

Robbennolt

J. K.

(2013). Neither admit nor deny. Monitor on Psychology, 44(8), 26.

Bromberg

Gilligan

Ramsay

(2017). Insider trading and market manipulation: The SEC’s enforcement outcomes. Securities Regulation Law Journal, 45(2), 109–125.

Charmaz

(2005). Grounded theory in the 21st century: A qualitative method for advancing social justice research. Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3, 507–535.

Chicago Board Options Exchange , Litigation release No. 69726. (Jun. 11, 2013). https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2013/34-69726.pdf

Choi

S. J.

Pritchard

A. C.

(2017). The SEC's shift to administrative proceedings: An empirical assessment. Yale Journal on Regulation, 34, 1.

Correia

M. M.

(2014). Political connections and SEC enforcement. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 57(2–3), 241–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2014.04.004

Cox

J. D.

Thomas

R. S.

(2018). Revolving elites: The unexplored risk of capturing the SEC. The Georgetown Law Journal, 107, 845.

10.

Dalton , Litigation release No. 22175. (Dec. 2, 2011). https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2011/lr22175.htm

11.

David , Litigation release No. 19841. (Sep. 20, 2006). https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2006/lr19841.htm

12.

Doherty , Litigation release No. 64496. (May 13, 2011). https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/admin/2011/34-64496.pdf

13.

Eaglesham

(2013, September 11). SEC tries to rebuild its reputation. In: The Wall street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/wall-street-fines-rose-in-2018-boosted-by-foreign-bribery-cases-1541163601

14.

Eaglesham

(2014, October 21). SEC is steering more trials to judges it appoints. In: The Wall street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/sec-is-steering-more-trials-to-judges-it-appoints-1413849590

15.

Fears , Exchange act release No, 47699. (Apr. 18, 2003). https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/34-47699.htm

16.

Glaser

B. G.

Strauss

A. L.

(2017). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Routledge.

17.

Greth , Litigation release No. 19441. (Oct. 24, 2005). https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr19441.htm

18.

Hazen

T. L.

(1979). Administrative enforcement: An evaluation of the securities and Exchange commission’s use of injunctions and other enforcement methods. Hastings Law Journal, 31, 427.

19.

Hicks , Litigation release No. 22655. (Mar. 20, 2013). https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2013/lr22655.htm

20.

i2 Technologies , Litigation release No. 18741. (Jun. 9, 2004). https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr18741.htm

21.

Jacobson , Litigation release No. 69014. (Mar. 1, 2013). https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/admin/2013/34-69014.pdf

22.

Jellum

L. D.

Tincher

M. M.

(2017). The shadow of free enterprise: The unconstitutionality of the securities and Exchange commission's administrative law judges. Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary, 37, 611.

23.

Katz

J. G.

(2009). Reviewing the SEC, Reinvigorating the SEC (71, p. 489). University of Pittsburgh Law Review. https://doi.org/10.5195/lawreview.2009.144

24.

Kavoukis

(2022). Paper gangsters: White collar and corporate crime on film. In: [Master’s Thesis]. Wilfrid Laurier University.

25.

Labuschagne

(2003). Qualitative research: Airy fairy or fundamental. Qualitative Report, 8(1), 100–103.

26.

Liebmann

S. N.

(2019). Dazed and confused: Revamping the SEC’s unpredictable calculation of civil penalties in the technological era. Duke Law Journal, 69, 429.

27.

Macey

J. R.

(2010). The distorting incentives facing the US Securities and Exchange Commission. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 33, 639.

28.

Martin

V. B.

(2006). The relationship between an emerging grounded theory and the existing literature: Four phases for consideration. Grounded Theory Review, 5(2–3), 47–50.

29.

Michaels

(2018, November 2). Wall street fines rose in 2018, boosted by foreign bribery cases. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/wall-street-fines-rose-in-2018-boosted-by-foreign-bribery-cases-1541163601

30.

Miller

(1979, October). S.E.C.: Watchdog 1929 lacked. The New York Times, D1.

31.

Moe

T. M.

(1982). Regulatory performance and presidential administration. American Journal of Political Science, 26(2), 197–224. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111036

32.

Nathanson , Litigation release No. 18861. (Aug. 31, 2004). https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr18861.htm

33.

Nocera

(2009, June) S.E.C. chased small fry while big fish, Madoff, swam free. The New York Times, B1.

34.

Ohana International, Inc. , Litigation release No. 18961. (Nov. 4, 2004). https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr18961.htm

35.

PA Fund Management LLC , Litigation release No. 50354. (Sep. 13, 2004). https://www.secgov/files/litigation/admin/34-50354.pdf

36.

Powell , Litigation release No. 18281. (Aug. 8, 2003). https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr18281.htm

37.

Pritchard

A. C.

(1999). Markets as monitors: A proposal to replace class actions with exchanges as securities fraud enforcers. Virginia Law Review, 85(6), 925–1020. https://doi.org/10.2307/1073966

38.

Rakoff

J. S.

(2014). Is the S.E.C. becoming a law unto itself? [PLI Securities Regulation Institute Keynote Address]. https://securitiesdiary.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/rakoff-pli-speech.pdf

39.

Rose

A. M.

(2008). Reforming securities litigation reform: Restructuring the relationship between public and private enforcement of Rule 10b-5. Columbia Law Review, 108, 1301.

40.

Rosenfeld

(2017). Admissions in SEC enforcement Cases: The revolution that wasn't. Iowa Law Review, 103, 113.

41.

Rosenfeld

(2019). Civil penalties against public companies in SEC enforcement actions: An empirical analysis (22, p. 135). University of Pennsylvania.

42.

Satyam Comput . Litigation Release No, 21915. Servs. Ltd. (Apr. 5, 2011). https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2011/lr21915.htm

43.

Shapiro

S. P.

(1984). Wayward capitalists: Targets of the securities and exchange commission. Yale University Press.

44.

Shapiro

S. P.

(1985). The road not taken: The elusive path to criminal prosecution for white-collar offenders (19(2), 179–217). Law and Society Review. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053454

45.

Spillson , Litigation release No. 71270. (Jan. 9, 2014). https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/admin/2014/34-71270.pdf

46.

Stake

R. E.

(1995). The art of case study research. Sage Publications.

47.

Strauss

A. L.

Corbin

J. M.

(1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications.

48.

Sutherland

E. H.

(1983). White collar crime: The uncut version. Yale University Press.

49.

Turk

M. C.

(2017). Regulation by settlement. Kansas Law Review, 66, 259.

50.

Turville

Firmin

Yearwood

Miller

(2010, December). Understanding victims of identity theft: A grounded theory approach. In Proceedings of the 5th international conference on qualitative research in IT and IT in qualitative research.

51.

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission . (2013, June 10). What we do. https://www.sec.gov/Article/whatwedo.html

52.

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission . (2019, November 6). Division of Enforcement 2019 annual report. https://www.sec.gov/files/enforcement-annual-report-2019.pdf

53.

Vadera

A. K.

Aguilera

R. V.

(2015). The evolution of vocabularies and its relation to investigation of white-collar crimes: An institutional work perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(1), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2079-x

54.

Velikonja

(2015). Reporting agency performance: Behind the SEC's enforcement statistics. Cornell Law Review, 101, 901.

55.

Velikonja

(2017). Are the SEC’s administrative law judges biased: An empirical investigation. Washington Law Review, 92, 315.

56.

Willott

Griffin

Torrance

(2001). Snakes and ladders: Upper-middle class male offenders talk about economic crime. Criminology, 39(2), 441–466. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2001.tb00929.x

57.

Yin

R. K.

(1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.