In Bellikoff v. Eaton Vance Corp., No. 05-6597 (2d Cir. Mar. 15, 2007), the court affirmed dismissal of claims arising from payment of fees to encourage Morgan Stanley and other brokers to sell Eaton Vance mutual fund shares. The plaintiffs, who owned shares in Eaton Vance mutual funds, sued under the Investment Company Act of 1940 and the Investment Advisors Act and state breach of fiduciary duty law. The court held that the statutes either didn’t provide a private cause of action, didn’t confer standing on shareholders individually, or didn’t prohibit the underlying conduct.

Barry Barnett

Free subscription to our feed here.