• HOME
  • SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
  • PROFILE
  • ALLEN MATKINS
  • CONTACT
Print Email Shortlink

Jobs Or Bucket Shops?

By Keith Paul Bishop on March 20, 2012 in Legislation

Last week, New York Times columnist Gail Collins wrote this Op-Ed piece criticizing the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (aka JOBS) Act (H.R. 3606).  Dave Lynn provided a good summary of the bill in this posting on TheCorporateCounsel.net blog.

In criticizing the JOBS Act, Ms. Collins remarked “You could also call it the Just Open Bucket Shops Act.”  But what exactly is a “bucket shop” and why would it be bad to open one? 

Here in California its been a felony for more than half a century to either make a bucketing contract or to keep a bucket shop.  Cal. Corp. Code § 29100.  See Daugherty v. Riley, 1 Cal.2d 298 (1934) (describing the Commissioner of Corporations’ authority under the Bucket Shop Act of 1923).  Although many people equate bucket shops with boiler rooms, they are not the same.  “Bucketing” refers to the practice of making contracts that are based on changes in the prices of securities or commodities.  Bucketing occurs, for example when parties enter into a contract with respect to the purchase or sale of securities or commodities that is settled based on publicly quoted prices but without a bona fide purchase or sale of the securities or commodities.  Cal. Corp. Code § 29008(a).  

Although the Commodity Exchange Act and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 preempted California’s bucket shop law to some extent, the scope of preemption may have been diminished to some degree by the Dodd-Frank Act.  See Does the Dodd-Frank Act Revive the CA Bucket Shop Law?

bucket shopsbucketingDaugherty v. RileyJOBS ActSection 29008(a)
  • Related Stories
  • Most Popular
  • If You’re Relying On The Signature Of Two Officers, You May Want To Think Again
  • Court Explicates Scope of Usury Exemption For Real Estate Brokers
  • Supreme Court To Decide If It Will Decide Whether Section 16 Plaintiff Has Constitutional Standing
  • But Wait, California May Require Even More In Annual Reports To Shareholders
  • California Requires Many Foreign Corporations To Send Annual Financial Statements To Shareholders
  • The Salon Sub Rosa And Nevada Corporate Law
  • Conflict Minerals Bill In Suspense File (For Now)
  • Concurrent Jurisdiction Found For Covered Class Actions
  • Nevada Supreme Court Adopts Delaware Approach To Fair Value Burden Of Proof
  • SEC Proposes John Wilkes Booth Rules
  • If I Were A Carpenter, I’d Build A Better Proxy
  • CalPERS’ Annus Horribilis: How Much Worse Will It Get?
← Previous Next →

AUTHOR

Keith Paul Bishop
Partner
(949) 553-1313
kbishop@allenmatkins.com
CONTACT ME

RECOGNITION

NEWSLETTER

TOPICS

  • Accountants
  • Administrative Procedure
  • Attorney-Client Privilege/Work Product
  • Broker-Dealers
  • California Securities Laws
  • California Sui Generis
  • CalPERS/CalSTRS
  • Choice of Law/Conflict of Law
  • Corporate Governance
  • Department of Corporations
  • Derivative Suits
  • Enforcement & Investigations
  • Fairness Hearings
  • Finance Lenders
  • Financial Institutions
  • Investment Advisers
  • JOBS Act
  • Legislation
  • Limited Liability Companies
  • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Nevada Corporations
  • Non-Compete Agreements
  • Partnerships
  • Professional Responsibility
  • Pseudo-Foreign Corporations
  • Public Records Act/FOIA
  • Secretary of State
  • Securities Litigation
  • Uncategorized
  • Video

YOUTUBE

TWITTER

FACEBOOK

CALENDAR

March 2012
M T W T F S S
« Feb   Apr »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Copyright © 2013 California Corporate & Securities Law.

Powered by WordPress and News.

  • follow:follow:
  • Become my Facebook friend Become my Facebook friend
  • Connect with me Connect with me
  • RSS RSS
  • Tweet with me Tweet with me