Touche Ross & Company v. Securities and Exchange Commission
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
609 F.2d 570 (1979)
Facts
In September 1976, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) (defendant) commenced an administrative proceeding pursuant to SEC Rule of Practice 2(e) to determine whether accounting firm Touche Ross & Company and three of its former partners (Touche) (plaintiffs) should be disciplined for engaging in unethical, unprofessional, or fraudulent conduct in connection with their audits of certain financial statements filed with the SEC. Before any hearings occurred, Touche sued the SEC and four of its commissioners (defendants) in federal court seeking, among other things, a declaratory judgment that (1) the rule exceeded the SEC’s statutory authority and jurisdiction by attempting to punish violations of the federal securities laws and (2) the administrative proceeding would violate Touche’s due-process rights because the SEC would not be impartial. In response, the SEC argued that the rule (a version of which had been enacted more than 40 years earlier and had never been found by a court to be invalid) was proper under the Securities Act of 1933. The SEC also argued that Touche’s suit was premature because Touche had not exhausted its administrative remedies. The district court granted the motion to dismiss. Touche appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Timbers, J.)
Concurrence (Kaufman, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 705,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,300 briefs, keyed to 983 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.
