Businesses of all types and sizes throughout the United States, Mexico and beyond bring their disputes to Gardere's litigation team and receive practical, responsive, boutique-style attention in return. Our clients have access to the firepower and value of a well-known and highly-regarded Firm's capabilities and interdisciplinary strengths.
Gardere has a national and international energy practice formed around our Energy Industry Team, which is a multidisciplinary group of approximately 60 attorneys with diverse backgrounds, experience and skills specific to the energy industry. Our team includes attorneys who have served as in-house counsel for major energy companies, providing a depth of insight into our clients' needs, issues and concerns. We understand and regularly practice in virtually every sector of the energy, and we represent a wide variety of industry participants from multinational corporations to individuals.
From our offices in the United States and Mexico, our International Practice helps clients operate in today’s global economy. We have more than 30 professionals operating as a boutique within an Am Law 200 law firm and are able to provide focused service with the resources of a large firm. We understand that clients who are engaged in the global marketplace need lawyers who can operate seamlessly across multiple jurisdictions. Our international experts are multi-lingual, are culturally fluent and intimately familiar with various legal systems across the world, especially those in Latin America. Whether you need help with commercial transactions, regulatory matters, customs and import regulations, immigration matters, M&A and joint ventures, international disputes, or international tax planning, Gardere’s international team is here to assist you.
We represent domestic and foreign private funds in all aspects of fund formation, fund operations, platform and add-on acquisitions, and portfolio company operations. Our team has a reputation for being the go-to-lawyers for private equity funds, hedge funds, venture capital funds and family offices. We are known for our vast deal experience, the efficient way we staff and manage our work, and the way we maintain our relationships. We get deals done with sophisticated, strategic, and practical advice tailored to the needs of our clients.
*Not admitted to practice law.
Crowdfunding as a method of raising capital for business ventures has received a fair amount of attention over the last year or so. It has been advocated – in principle, at least – by a number of bloggers and internet commentators. The obstacles to it posed by the securities-registration requirements of the federal Securities Act of 1933 and of the various state securities laws have been the subject of a number of blog posts or entries and even scholarly papers. The Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission promised, in a letter to Representative Darrell Issa dated April 6, 2011, that the SEC staff would study and address crowdfunding as part of its review of the SEC’s capital-formation regulations. (On this point, also see the post “SEC Takes a Look at Capital Raising.”)
The SEC pursued two persons who proposed to raise $300 million by crowdfunding to acquire Pabst Brewing Company, and those persons agreed to a Cease and Desist Order by the SEC dated June 8, 2011 (PDF). Last month, Representative Patrick McHenry introduced a bill, H.R. 2930, to amend the Securities Act to provide an exemption from registration for securities issuances of up to $5 million that involve individual investments of less than $10,000 or 10% of the investor’s annual income, whichever is less. The bill would also provide for federal preemption of state laws requiring securities registration and for an exception to the requirement under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 that an issuer register its securities held by 500 or more holders of record.
The bill is clearly the result of some thought about how the current federal and state securities laws make crowdfunding for business-capital raising impractical (or, without the required registrations, illegal). For example, the bill reflects that a federal exemption from securities registration under the Securities Act alone would not be sufficient. Like the SEC’s existing Rule 504 exemption, state securities laws would require registration of any crowdfunding effort that involved or constituted a public securities offering.
Without otherwise commenting on the bill, however, it appears that the amendments proposed by the bill would not be sufficient to really permit crowdfunding for business-capital-raising under the securities laws. As Professor C. Steven Bradford has persuasively argued in his working paper, Crowdfunding and the Federal Securities Laws, it is likely that, under the SEC’s standards, if the existing websites that conduct crowdfunding were to do so for capital-raising purposes, those sites or their operators would be considered securities brokers or investment advisers under the federal securities laws. If so characterized under federal securities laws, it is also likely that they would be considered securities brokers or investment advisers under various state securities laws.
OUR TAKE: To enable crowdfunding as a method of raising capital for business ventures, legislation would need to address not only existing securities-registration requirements, but also existing federal and state laws and regulations governing securities intermediaries such as brokers and investment advisers.
The publications contained in this site do not constitute legal advice. Legal advice can only be given with knowledge of the client's specific facts. By putting these publications on our website we do not intend to create a lawyer-client relationship with the user. Materials may not reflect the most current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. This information should in no way be taken as an indication of future results.
You may use the wildcard symbol (*) as a root expander. A search for "anti*" will find not only "anti", but also "anti-trust", "antique", etc.
Entering two terms together in a search field will behave as though an "OR" is being used. For example, entering "Antique Motorcars" as a Client Name search will find results with either word in the Client Name.
AND and OR may be used in a search. Note: they must be capitalized, e.g., "Project AND Finance."
The + and - sign operators may be used. The + sign indicates that the term immediately following is required, while the - sign indicates to omit results that contain that term. E.g., "+real -estate" says results must have "real" but not "estate".
To perform an exact phrase search, surround your search phrase with quotation marks. For example, "Project Finance".
Searches are not case sensitive.