Law Professor headed to Supreme Court
Lyman Johnson will provide expert insight
Melissa Szumlic, '10
Issue date: 3/25/09 Section: News
Washington and Lee School of Law Professor Lyman P.Q. Johnson will serve as an expert witness before the U.S. Supreme Court next term.
Johnson is the Robert O. Bentley Professor of Law at the Washington and Lee University School of Law, where he teaches and writes about corporate and securities law. Johnson's expert testimony has been employed in several high-profile corporate lawsuits in recent years, and this will not be his first trip to the Supreme Court.
This time, Johnson will serve as an expert for the plaintiffs in Jones v. Harris, a case involving a mutual fund management company and allegations of excessive fees. Johnson has served as witness in the case for the past three years while it has moved through the lower courts.
The plaintiffs, a group of three investors, allege that mutual fund manager Harris Associates L.P. charged excessive advisory fees for a certain group of mutual funds. The plaintiffs say these high rates violated the Investment Company Act, which was designed to protect investors.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit decided against the plaintiffs in Jones. This decision created a split with a Second Circuit decision in the seminal case in this area, Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management Inc. Johnson recently wrote about the Gartenberg standard in a 2008 Vanderbilt Law Review article. The Supreme Court's decision to hear Jones was likely in an effort to resolve the circuit court split.
While Gartenberg helped judges determine reasonable fees charged by mutual fund advisors, Chief Judge for the Seventh Circuit Frank Easterbrook wrote in his decision that the market should determine reasonable fees, not judges. Judge Richard Posner disagreed with Easterbrook in a nine-page decision.
"There tend to be some very strong philosophical differences," said Johnson. Some believe that the mutual fund market is competitive enough to keep fees in check, while others argue that this has failed in the past.
When the case goes before the Supreme Court, Johnson says at the very least the Court will have to "grapple with the text of the [Gartenberg] standard" and clarify it further. Johnson says he believes that any decision the Court makes would have a positive impact for investors, but that he doesn't know what that decision will be.
"I don't have a crystal ball," Johnson said.
Johnson is the Robert O. Bentley Professor of Law at the Washington and Lee University School of Law, where he teaches and writes about corporate and securities law. Johnson's expert testimony has been employed in several high-profile corporate lawsuits in recent years, and this will not be his first trip to the Supreme Court.
This time, Johnson will serve as an expert for the plaintiffs in Jones v. Harris, a case involving a mutual fund management company and allegations of excessive fees. Johnson has served as witness in the case for the past three years while it has moved through the lower courts.
The plaintiffs, a group of three investors, allege that mutual fund manager Harris Associates L.P. charged excessive advisory fees for a certain group of mutual funds. The plaintiffs say these high rates violated the Investment Company Act, which was designed to protect investors.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit decided against the plaintiffs in Jones. This decision created a split with a Second Circuit decision in the seminal case in this area, Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management Inc. Johnson recently wrote about the Gartenberg standard in a 2008 Vanderbilt Law Review article. The Supreme Court's decision to hear Jones was likely in an effort to resolve the circuit court split.
While Gartenberg helped judges determine reasonable fees charged by mutual fund advisors, Chief Judge for the Seventh Circuit Frank Easterbrook wrote in his decision that the market should determine reasonable fees, not judges. Judge Richard Posner disagreed with Easterbrook in a nine-page decision.
"There tend to be some very strong philosophical differences," said Johnson. Some believe that the mutual fund market is competitive enough to keep fees in check, while others argue that this has failed in the past.
When the case goes before the Supreme Court, Johnson says at the very least the Court will have to "grapple with the text of the [Gartenberg] standard" and clarify it further. Johnson says he believes that any decision the Court makes would have a positive impact for investors, but that he doesn't know what that decision will be.
"I don't have a crystal ball," Johnson said.
Viewing Comments 1 - 3 of 3
Dennis Dutterer
posted 3/25/09 @ 9:11 PM EST
Who wrote this article? Not an attorney I hope. The US Supreme Court is not a trial court. Thus no one testifies before the Court as either a fact or as an expert witness. (Continued…)
Virginia Beach Movers
posted 6/25/09 @ 11:05 AM EST
Dennis brings up a good point - the Supreme Court doesn't hear witnesses. Surely the author made a mistake, or something quite unusual is going on.
how to write a CV
posted 12/15/09 @ 5:42 AM EST
I think it is good that Johnson will serve as an expert for the plaintiffs in Jones v. Harris, a case involving a mutual fund management company and allegations of excessive fees. (Continued…)
Post a Comment