The list keeps growing….
In a follow-up to last week’s statement by leading law firms declaring that the recent lawsuits by former SEC commissioner and current NYU Law professor Robert Jackson and Yale Law School professor John Morley, were “without factual or legal basis”, an additional nine law firms have added their names to the list.
The now 58 total firms puts additional pressure on the lawsuit allegations that SPACs are “investment companies”. Jackson and Morley have yet to comment.
You can find the full press release HERE along with an article this morning on DealBook recapping the recent events.
Over 55 of the Nation’s Leading Law Firms Respond to Investment Company Act Lawsuits Targeting the SPAC Industry
August 30, 2021
Recently a purported shareholder of certain special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs) initiated derivative lawsuits asserting that the SPACs are investment companies under the Investment Company Act of 1940, because proceeds from their initial public offerings are invested in short-term treasuries and qualifying money market funds.
Under the provision of the 1940 Act relied upon in the lawsuits, an investment company is a company that is or holds itself out as being engaged primarily, or proposes to engage primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities.
SPACs, however, are engaged primarily in identifying and consummating a business combination with one or more operating companies within a specified period of time. In connection with an initial business combination, SPAC investors may elect to remain invested in the combined company or get their money back. If a business combination is not completed in a specified period of time, investors also get their money back. Pending the earlier to occur of the completion of a business combination or the failure to complete a business combination within a specified timeframe, almost all of a SPAC’s assets are held in a trust account and limited to short-term treasuries and qualifying money market funds.
Consistent with longstanding interpretations of the 1940 Act, and its plain statutory text, any company that temporarily holds short-term treasuries and qualifying money market funds while engaging in its primary business of seeking a business combination with one or more operating companies is not an investment company under the 1940 Act. As a result, more than 1,000 SPAC IPOs have been reviewed by the staff of the SEC over two decades and have not been deemed to be subject to the 1940 Act.
The undersigned law firms view the assertion that SPACs are investment companies as without factual or legal basis and believe that a SPAC is not an investment company under the 1940 Act if it (i) follows its stated business plan of seeking to identify and engage in a business combination with one or more operating companies within a specified period of time and (ii) holds short-term treasuries and qualifying money market funds in its trust account pending completion of its initial business combination.[1]
None of the firms subscribing to this document intends hereby to give legal advice to any person. Any person seeking legal advice should consult with an attorney.
[1] Certain of these lawsuits also claim that personnel of the SPAC sponsor are acting as unregistered investment advisers under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 by advising on the SPAC business combination (which the plaintiff incorrectly asserts constitutes advice as to investing in, purchasing, or selling securities). The law firms listed herein also view this claim as without legal basis and do not believe that such personnel or the SPAC sponsor are unregistered investment advisers.
Arnold & Porter
Baker & McKenzie LLP
Baker Botts LLP
Blank Rome LLP
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
Clifford Chance US LLP
Cooley LLP
Covington & Burling LLP
Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP
Crowell & Moring LLP
Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Debevoise & Plimpton LLP
DLA Piper LLP (US)
Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP
Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP
Fenwick & West LLP
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer US LLP
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
Goodwin Procter LLP
Graubard Miller
Greenberg Traurig, LLP
Hogan Lovells US LLP
Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
King & Spalding LLP
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Latham & Watkins LLPLoeb & Loeb LLP
Mayer Brown LLP
McDermott Will & Emery LLP
Milbank LLP
Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
Paul Hastings LLP
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Perkins Coie LLP
Proskauer Rose LLP
Reed Smith LLP
Ropes & Gray LLP
Schiff Hardin LLP
Shearman & Sterling LLP
Sidley Austin LLP
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
Vinson & Elkins LLP
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
White & Case LLP
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
Winston & Strawn LLP
Remember the metaverse? Many do not. Meta’s (NASDAQ:META) attempted transition to virtually living and working seemed to mark a trend that went up and down quickly, but one SPAC deal has both survived that roller coaster and may rise with a second. Back in December 2022, Newbury Street (NASDAQ:NBST) announced a $1.85 billion combination with...
At the SPAC of Dawn Tucked into the bill that provides $95 billion in funding to American allies passed by the House this weekend is another measure that is likely to have far more impact on at least one pending deal in SPAC world. It would appear that the timing was fortuitous for TikTok rival...
With the passage this weekend of $95 billion in funding for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan by the House of Representatives, some focus has gone back towards the defense sector, which has generally had a good year as a whole. But, SPACs have not been as active in defense, despite the fact that companies in the...
At the SPAC of Dawn As April’s sleepy month for SPAC news continues, there is only one special meeting on the docket to consider a SPAC deal approval, that being today’s vote on Pegasus Digital Mobility‘s (NYSE:PGSS) combination with equipment manufacturer Schmid. Three more SPACs are facing extension votes this week, including Pyrophyte (NYSE:PHYT), whose...
Terms Tracker for the Week Ending April 19, 2024 Welcome to our weekly column where we discuss the findings from our IPO terms tracker based on the previous week’s pricings. Passover and school spring break starts next week, which most likely means a slowdown in SPAC filing activity. Although Churchill IX is now rumored to...