George Santos Settles Regulator’s Claim Over ‘Manipulative Activity’ on Kalshi

Former congressman George Santos will pay more than $35,000 to settle a regulator’s claim that he manipulated wagers on prediction market Kalshi over whether he would attend the State of the Union.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission said Friday that Santos made over $17,000 by making timely bets on his attendance at the president’s annual address to Congress. The regulator accused him of making misrepresentations and omissions on social media that influenced the price of his positions and said he improperly traded on an event that he had the power to influence.

Santos’s attorney Joseph Murray acknowledged his client made bets about his State of the Union attendance but denied that the ex-congressman intentionally manipulated the market. Murray said the settlement didn’t require Santos to admit wrongdoing.

“He chose a prompt, practical resolution rather than protracted, costly litigation,” Murray said. “And that choice should not be mistaken for an admission of any wrongdoing, because it is not one.”

by WSJ

SEC Bank Secrecy Act Enforcement Upheld by Tenth Circuit Panel

A securities firm lost its appeal challenging an SEC rule requiring brokers to report suspicious financial transactions, marking the agency’s latest win over its authority to enforce the Bank Secrecy Act.

Scottsdale Capital Advisors failed to show how the Securities and Exchange Commission violated the Administrative Procedure Act because it didn’t target a final agency action, the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit said in a Friday ruling, upholding a Utah district court’s decision to dismiss the firm’s lawsuit.

by Bloomberg Law

Zync v. Porsche and the D&O Risks of VC Board Seats

Venture firms obtain board seats to protect their investments. Zync recounts allegations — so far only allegations — of a board seat operating as the instrument through which an investment destroyed the company. If those allegations are ultimately credited, the exposure will not have stopped with the director. It will have traveled to the investor that gave the instructions, through contracts that routed a veto through a fiduciary, and into two insurance programs whose responses may depend on incompatible characterizations of a single individual’s role. The board seat may be insured. The instructions behind the board seat may not be. For venture investors, the lesson is that a designee must exercise independent fiduciary judgment. For the D&O insurance market, the harder question is whether coverage follows the director when the complaint alleges that the independence disappeared.

by The D&O Diary

The talent raid that shook New York’s most prestigious law firm

Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email [email protected] to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://help.ft.com/faq/gifting-and-sharing-an-article/what-is-a-gift-article/.
https://www.ft.com/content/1023c8a4-fbb9-45ee-84ef-71b5fd48a1dd?syn-25a6b1a6=1

Savitt’s move is notable even in an industry gripped by a transfer-market frenzy in recent years, where superstars are offered pay packages in excess of $20mn a year to jump ship.

Such moves have largely applied to top M&A and private equity lawyers, who produce a large and growing fee pool that is more predictable than litigation work. Savitt’s move is the clearest sign yet of how far-reaching the talent battle has become, spreading to litigators and law firm leaders.

“It’s a sign that it’s a complete free market at all levels in the legal profession right now,” the law firm head said. Savitt’s departure is also the first instance of a de facto managing partner leaving for a rival Wall Street firm.

by FT