Securities and Exchange Commission v. W. J. Howey Co. | |
---|---|
Argued May 2, 1946 Decided May 27, 1946 | |
Full case name | Securities and Exchange Commission v. W. J. Howey Co. et al. |
Citations | 328 U.S. 293 (more) |
Case history | |
Prior | Injunction denied, 60 F. Supp. 440 (S.D. Fla. 1945); affirmed, 151 F.2d 714 (5th Cir. 1945); certiorari granted, 327 U.S. 773 (1946). |
Subsequent | Rehearing Denied October 14, 1946 |
Holding | |
An investment contract for purposes of the Securities Act means a contract, transaction or scheme whereby a person invests his money in a common enterprise and is led to expect profits solely from the efforts of the promoter or a third party, it being immaterial whether the shares in the enterprise are evidenced by formal certificates or by nominal interests in the physical assets employed in the enterprise. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Murphy, joined by Black, Reed, Douglas, Burton, Rutledge |
Dissent | Frankfurter |
Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
Laws applied | |
Securities Act of 1933 |
Securities and Exchange Commission v. W. J. Howey Co., 328 U.S. 293 (1946), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the offer of a land sales and service contract was an "investment contract" within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. § 77b) and that the use of the mails and interstate commerce in the offer and sale of these securities was a violation of §5 of the Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77e.[1] It was an important case in determining the general applicability of the federal securities laws.
The case resulted in a test, known as the Howey test, to determine whether an instrument qualifies as an "investment contract" for the purposes of the Securities Act: "a contract, transaction or scheme whereby a person invests his money in a common enterprise and is led to expect profits solely from the efforts of the promoter or a third party."[1]