Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status
  • N
  • New York City Employees’ Retirement Sy…New York City Employees’ Retirement System v. Securities and Exchange Commission
From our private database of 16,800+ case briefs...

New York City Employees’ Retirement System v. Securities and Exchange Commission

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
45 F.3d 7 (1995)


Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc. (Cracker Barrel), issued a press release, stating that the company would no longer employ homosexuals. Cracker Barrel subsequently fired several gay employees. The New York City Employees’ Retirement System (NYCERS) (plaintiff) and two other institutional investors (plaintiffs), who were shareholders of Cracker Barrel, proposed a new policy to Cracker Barrel’s board of directors that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. NYCERS requested that the policy be put to a shareholder vote. Under Rule 14a-8(c)(7), 17 C.F.R. § 240.14a-8(c)(7), of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) (defendant), publicly traded companies are required to include shareholder-requested proposals in the proxy materials for a shareholder vote, unless the proposal deals with ordinary business operations. The SEC had indicated in a 1976 rule that corporations could not use this exception to exclude proposals that inherently involved matters with significant policy, economic, or other implications. Cracker Barrel requested a no-action letter from the SEC regarding the omission of the proposal from the proxy materials. The SEC issued the requested no-action letter and indicated that proposals dealing with employment policies and practices would no longer be interpreted to fall outside of Rule 14a-8(c)(7)’s parameters when dealing with social issues. NYCERS and the two other institutional investors sued the SEC, alleging that the SEC had adopted a new legislative rule without complying with the notice-and-comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 553(b). The district court found that the SEC had adopted a new legislative rule without first submitting the rule for notice and comment and enjoined the SEC from issuing any additional no-action letters that were inconsistent with the 1976 rule. The SEC appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (McLaughlin, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 449,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 449,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 16,800 briefs, keyed to 224 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Questions & Answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Sign up for a FREE 7-day trial