This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Ps brought suit claiming that D violated § 36(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, 15 U.S.C. § 80a-35(b). D was paid 1% (per year) of the first $2 billion of the fund's assets, 0.9% of the next $1 billion, 0.8% of the next $2 billion, and 0.75% of anything over $5 billion. It was undisputed that these fees are roughly the same (in both level and breakpoints) as those that other funds of similar size and investment goals pay their advisers, and that the fee structure is lawful under the Investment Advisers Act. The trial court granted D summary judgment. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.