April 27, 2010
"In connection with" and the SEC's Goldman Complaint
Is anyone else confused over which "security" the alleged misrepresentations were "in connection with" for purposes of Rule 10b-5? Early in the Complaint, the Abacus CDO appears to be the security in question. But near the conclusion, the reader learns that the fraud was in connection with "securities or securities based swap agreements" (suggesting that the applicable security may be the credit default swap, whose purchaser was not the alleged victim).
Could Goldman be saving such an argument as a possible defense?
April 27, 2010 | Permalink