Among the many measures Congress included when it enacted the sweeping Dodd-Frank Act in 2010 was a provision directing the SEC to require companies to disclose the ratio of CEO compensation to median employee compensation. The statutory provision, incorporated into Section 953(b) of the Act, reflected a perception that CEO compensation had gotten out of
Proxy Disclosure “Say on Pay” Cases Continue to Fail
Over the last several years, plaintiffs’ lawyer have rushed to file “say on pay” lawsuits – either by filing an compensation-related lawsuit in the wake of a negative say on pay vote, or more recently by filing a lawsuit in advance of the vote, alleging that the compensation-related proxy disclosures were inadequate. As I
Have We Seen the Last of “Say-On-Pay” Litigation?
Is it possible that we seen the last of “Say-On-Pay” lawsuits? Or are we just awaiting the next round of post-Dodd Frank executive compensation-related litigation? Those are the questions asked in a June 12, 2013 memorandum entitled “Has Another Wave of ‘Say-On-Pay’ Litigation Come to an End?” (here) by Nicholas Even of the Haynes
Now Up: The “Third Wave” of Executive Compensation Litigation
The first wave of “say on pay” litigation involved lawsuits brought by shareholders following a negative advisory say on pay vote under the Dodd-Frank Act. The second wave of say on pay litigation, which picked up in 2012, involved plaintiffs’ efforts to enjoin upcoming shareholder votes on compensation or employee share plans on the
“Say on Pay” and Executive Compensation Litigation: Plaintiffs’ New Racket
I am pleased to publish below a guest post from Bruce Vanyo, Richard Zelichov and Christina Costley of the Katten Muchin Rosenman law firm These three attorneys’ post addresses a new approach that plaintiffs’ lawyers are taking to “say on pay” challenges – that is, a preemptive attack in the form of a lawsuit
The SEC’s Latest Use of its SOX Section 304 Compensation Clawback Authority
In the latest example of the SEC’s use of its compensation clawback authority under Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the SEC reached a settlement with the former CFO of Beazer Homes to return more than $1.4 million in bonus compensation he earned during a period when the company was committing accounting fraud. As is
First the “Say on Pay,” Then the Lawsuit?
One of the many changes introduced by the Dodd-Frank Act was the requirement for a shareholder vote to approve executive compensation. Under the Act’s provisions, the vote is not binding on the company or its board, but is purely advisory. Nevertheless, companies whose shareholders vote against their “Say on Pay” resolutions are finding that lawsuits
Do Comp Reform Proposals Threaten Increased Board Exposures?
One of the propositions on which most commentators seem to agree is that perverse compensation incentives helped fuel the global economic crisis. For example, last Wednesday, formed Fed Chairman Paul Volcker said in a speech that one of the causes of the financial crisis "was the ultimately explosive combination of compensation practices that provided enormous
CEO Not Charged With Fraud But SEC Pursues Clawback Anyway
By the SEC’s own account, an enforcement action the SEC initiated on July 22, 2009 represents the first occasion on which it has used the Sarbanes-Oxley Act’s "clawback" provision to recover compensation from an individual not otherwise alleged to have violated the securities laws. While this type of action apparently was contemplated by the statute
Executive Compensation: The New Front Line in the Litigation Wars?
Litigation over executive compensation is nothing new. The long-running clash over Richard Grasso’s $187 million NYSE pay package is only one of many titanic legal battles compensation issues produced in the past. But executive compensation litigation recently seems to have entered a new phase, fueled by moral outrage.
Drawing on popular anger evidenced most