martindale.com
Legal Library
|
Supreme Court to Address Standard for Challenges Investment Adviser Fees under the Investment Company Act
by Elizabeth J. Betta
Arnold & Porter LLP - Washington Office
John A. Freedman
Arnold & Porter LLP - Washington Office
Scott B. Schreiber
Arnold & Porter LLP - Washington Office
Richard P. Swanson
Arnold & Porter LLP - New York Office
Michael D. Trager
Arnold & Porter LLP - Washington Office
|
|
November 3, 2009
Previously published on November 2009
On November 2, 2009, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., No. 08-586, a matter concerning claims under Section 36(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 against a mutual fund investment adviser alleging that the adviser breached its fiduciary duties because fees charged were "disproportionate" to the services rendered and "not within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm's length." ...The Supreme Court review of the Seventh Circuit's decision presents an opportunity to provide clarity and uniformity in the standard courts, which are to apply in assessing challenges to advisory fees. www.arnoldporter.com
|
The views expressed in this document are solely the views of the author and not Martindale-Hubbell. This document is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. |
| | View More Library Documents By... | | | | |
| | | | Arnold & Porter LLP Overview |
Practice Area Resource Centers
|
|