Is internal e-mail the smoking gun in Morgan Keegan case?

2007 memo from director of investments questions asset-backed bets in bond fund; ‘Mr. & Mrs. Jones don't expect that kind of risk'

Apr 9, 2010 @ 12:29 pm

By Dan Jamieson

Plaintiff's attorneys who are suing Morgan Keegan & Co. Inc. for its failed Regions Morgan Keegan Select bond funds are in an uproar over what they claim is the firm's cover-up of embarrassing documents.

The furor is the result of the complaint filed by several state regulators that revealed internal Morgan Keegan documents that plaintiff's attorneys say should have been produced during arbitration hearings but were not.

For example, a May 2007 email sent by Gary Stringer, director of investments for Morgan Keegan's Wealth Management Services division, reads:

"What worries me about this [Regions Morgan Keegan Select Intermediate] bond fund is the tracking error and the potential risks associated with all that asset-backed exposure. Mr. & Mrs. Jones don't expect that kind of risk from their bond funds. The bond exposure is not supposed to be where you take risks. I'd bet that most of the people who hold that fund have no idea what's [sic] it's actually invested in. I'm just as sure that most of our FAs have no idea what's in that fund either."

Mr. Stringer's "e-mail just kills [Morgan Keegan] to me. That's just shocking," said Craig McCann, president of Securities Litigation and Consulting Group Inc., an expert witness who testifies for plaintiffs in Morgan Keegan arbitrations.

"I had heard that [the Stringer email] existed, and I've been pressuring Morgan Keegan attorneys to produce that," but the firm has refused, said Scott Beall, a Memphis, Tenn. plaintiff's attorney with several cases pending against the firm.

Mr. Beall said a broker for an investor he represents was one of the individuals who was copied on the Stringer email.

Regulators also claim that in the summer of 2007, Kim Escue, a fixed-income analyst for the Wealth Management Services division, was stonewalled by Mr. Kelsoe's group in her attempts to update the division's research on one of the bond funds.

"They have let me sit for nearly three weeks with no comments, feedback, or information that I have requested," Ms. Escue wrote in a July 2007 e-mail that was attached to the state complaint.

The WMS division "failed to notify the [Morgan Keegan] sales force or the … compliance department of [the] refusal to cooperate," the state regulators' complaint says.

"The assertions made by the plaintiff's attorneys are simply not true," said Morgan Keegan spokesman Eric Bran in a statement. "We have provided the documents required of us in the arbitration process."

Mr. Bran said the firm will "vigorously refute" the charges brought by regulators.

"We are disappointed at the decision by these agencies and the states to bring charges which we believe are meritless and based upon erroneous hindsight analysis," he said in a statement.

In addition to the state complaint, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. also filed charges against the firm last week.

Plaintiff's lawyers are happy that regulators have taken action. They also say that under Finra rules, brokerage firms are supposed to automatically produce a variety of documents for arbitration cases.

Arbitration panels can also order document production.

Of course, when regulators serve a subpoena, “a brokerage firm sits up and listens," said Scott Shewan, a Clovis, Calif. attorney and president of the Public Investors Arbitration Bar Association, which represents plaintiff's lawyers.

"When an arbitration panel issues an order, there's always room for interpretation," he said. "It's not quite the same hammer."

Morgan Keegan "has denied the existence of documents [and] denied the rules of discovery, and to some extent they've gotten away with it, at least until yesterday" when the state complaint uncovered some of the material, said Dale Ledbetter, a plaintiff's attorney in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.

Morgan Keegan has produced some documents for arbitration hearings, but usually under the condition of arbitrator-ordered confidentiality, plaintiff's attorneys say, so the information cannot be shared among lawyers.

Morgan Keegan will have a harder time keeping those documents out [of arbitrations] in the future" now that some have come public, Mr. McCann said.

Plaintiff's attorneys estimate that several hundred cases are pending against Morgan Keegan over the bond funds.

In 2008 and 2009, Morgan Keegan spent a total of $251 million on legal costs, according to the latest annual report of Regions Financial Corp., which owns Morgan Keegan.

The bond funds at issue — which at one point had $2 billion in assets — invested in risky mortgage-backed securities but lost most of their value in 2007 and 2008 following the collapse of the real estate markets.


What do you think?

View comments

Recommended for you

Upcoming Event

Jul 10


Women Adviser Summit

The InvestmentNews Women Adviser Summit, a one-day workshop now held in four cities due to popular demand, is uniquely designed for the sophisticated female adviser who wants to take her personal and professional self to the next level.... Learn more

Featured video


Behind the scenes at Pershing Insite 2018

What goes on behind the scenes at one of the industry's biggest conferences? Join us for an all-access sneak peek!

Latest news & opinion

Divorce reduces retirement readiness

The new tax law could increase financial challenges for divorced people, but planning opportunities abound.

Merrill Lynch fined $42 million for misleading customers

In addition to the practice of 'masking' trades, the wirehouse went to extremes to cover up the wrongdoing.

Advisers with billions in AUM leaving Wall Street

Merrill Lynch has seen two teams exit recently, each with more than $4 billion in client assets.

Wells Fargo weighs changes to wealth unit

The move would reflect the bank's effort to cut $4 billion in costs.

Small broker-dealers seek legislative relief from annual audits

Bills introduced in House, Senate would remove PCAOB requirement.


Hi! Glad you're here and we hope you like all the great work we do here at InvestmentNews. But what we do is expensive and is funded in part by our sponsors. So won't you show our sponsors a little love by whitelisting It'll help us continue to serve you.

Yes, show me how to whitelist

Ad blocker detected. Please whitelist us or give premium a try.


Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print