CASE 21.3 In re Lehman Bros. Mortgage-Backed Securities Litigation (2011) involved a question of whether rating agencies that helped select a pool of mortgages for a mortgage-backed security were "underwriters" under the 1933 Act or "controlling persons" under section 15 of the 1933 Act. How did the court rule?
a. The court ruled that the proof established that the rating agencies were both underwriters and controlling persons under the 1933 Act.
b. The court ruled that the proof failed to establish that the rating agencies were either underwriters or controlling persons under the 1933 Act.
c. The court ruled that the proof established that the rating agencies were underwriters under the 1933 Act but that the proof failed to establish that the rating agencies were controlling persons under the 1933 Act.
d. The court ruled that the proof established that the rating agencies were controlling persons under the 1933 Act but that the proof failed to establish that the rating agencies were underwriters under the 1933 Act.
b
You might also like to view...
Business torts consist of:
a. interference with contractual relations. b. disparagement. c. fraudulent misrepresentation. d. Each of these are correct.
Open and notorious possession requires the adverse possessor to give actual notice of possession to the title holder
Indicate whether the statement is true or false