The Catch with Kokesh: Insurers Refusing to Cover Disgorgement to SEC

by King & Spalding
Contact

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Kokesh v. SEC, which defined  disgorgement as a penalty subject to the five-year statute of limitations, we observed that the decision was likely to have far-reaching implications beyond the potential disgorgement recovery period and associated effect on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC” or “Commission”) investigation timelines.[i]  Among other questions, we noted that because Commission settlements have generally prohibited defendants from seeking or accepting reimbursement or indemnification for “penalties,” while not including similar prohibitions for disgorgement, Kokesh raised whether “defendants and respondents [can] still seek indemnification or insurance coverage for disgorgement and pre-judgment interest?”[ii]  Indeed, within days after the Kokesh decision, counsel for insurance companies asked to renew a motion to dismiss and argued that they were not required to indemnify Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc. (“Bear Stearns”) for disgorgement payments in a long-running dispute regarding a Commission settlement.[iii]

On September 20, 2018, a panel of the New York Appellate Division’s First Department reversed a lower court decision and held that in light of Kokesh, J.P. Morgan and Bear Stearns’ insurers were not required to cover $140 million disgorgement related to the illicit gains of Bear Stearns’ customers that the firm paid in 2006 to settle SEC charges of “late trading” and “market timing.”[iv]  The policies in question excluded “fines or penalties imposed by law” from the definition of a covered “loss.”  The panel found that because Kokesh had determined that disgorgement paid to the SEC is a “penalty” regardless of whether the funds are linked to the wrongdoer’s illicit gains or the illicit gains of third parties, the disgorgement paid by Bear Stearns was not covered.[v]

While the J.P. Morgan decision will not be the final word on the insurability of disgorgement, the policy language at issue is commonplace and insurers certainly will cite the case to support denials of coverage.  Additionally, courts in a number of states have held that fines and penalties are not insurable as a matter of public policy.[vi]  It remains to be seen whether parties facing SEC investigations will be more reluctant to settle if they are unable to obtain coverage for amounts they would be required to pay in disgorgement.  It also remains to be seen whether insurance providers, in an effort to gain a competitive market advantage, will revise their forms and/or offer endorsements specifically agreeing to cover disgorgement wherever permissible under the law.

New Name, Same Policy: From Bear Stearns’ to J.P. Morgan

The First Department’s decision is the latest chapter in a lengthy legal battle between J.P. Morgan and the defendant insurance companies.[vii]  In March 2006, Bear Stearns entered into a settlement with the Commission for $250 million to resolve charges that Bear Stearns facilitated “late trading” and deceptive “market timing” by certain hedge fund customers, who allegedly earned hundreds of millions of dollars at the expense of mutual fund shareholders.  The “no admit, no deny” settlement included $160 million in disgorgement, $140 million of which was attributable to the hedge funds’ profits, rather than Bear Stearns’ own gains.[viii]  Vigilant Insurance Company and the other defendants refused to indemnify Bear Stearns.  J.P. Morgan instituted the coverage action against the defendant insurers after it acquired Bear Stearns in 2008.

A lengthy cycle of appeals began after Justice Ramos at the New York Supreme Court for New York County, Manhattan, refused to dismiss the claims against the insurers on the grounds that the court could not conclude, based on the SEC’s order, that disgorgement was specifically linked to improperly acquired funds and that no public policy reason mandated dismissal.[ix]  On appeal in 2011, a First Department panel reversed that decision and dismissed the case, ruling that public policy barred Bear Stearns from receiving insurance coverage for any of the $160 million disgorgement payment.[x]   That decision was then appealed and the Court of Appeals reversed and reinstated the complaint in 2013.

The Court of Appeals noted that the defendant insurers did not establish that Bear Stearns’ disgorgement-related losses were barred from insurance coverage under their policies.  In doing so, the Court of Appeals noted that, although other courts have found the risk of being forced to disgorge “ill-gotten gains” uninsurable “as a matter of contract interpretation or public policy,” the evidence did not decisively show that the Commission’s disgorgement calculation  was based on Bear Stearns' own profits, which would fall outside of the policies’ definition of covered “loss,” rather than third party profits, which would fall within the policies’ definition of covered “loss.”  For this same reason, the court rejected the insurer’s arguments that the policies’ personal profit exclusion barred coverage.  Finally, the Court explained that the insurers did not meet the standard to invoke either “public policy exception” they cited.  The Court rejected the first exception, that coverage is barred when an insured acts with “intent to cause injury,” because the record did not conclusively show that Bear Stearns had this intent.  The Court also rejected the second exception, which prohibits indemnification of an insured’s illicit gains.

Following the Court of Appeals’ decision, Judge Ramos granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and ordered the insurers to indemnify Bear Stearns for the $140 million in disgorgement it paid based on the hedge funds’ gains.[xi]   Judge Ramos’ rationale rested on five key findings.   First, based on the policy’s broad definition, the $140 million disgorgement payment constituted a covered “loss” because it represented third-party gain.  Second, the public policy exception for loss arising out of intentionally harmful conduct did not bar coverage because there was no evidence that Bear Stearns intended to cause injury to mutual fund investors.  Third, the personal profit exclusion did not bar coverage because it applied to claims based on or arising out of the insured gaining personal profit or advantage.  But here, third parties realized profits while Bear Stearns did not receive any additional compensation for its late trading and market timing transactions beyond what it would have for other mutual fund trades.  Fourth, the prior knowledge exclusion did not bar coverage because, when construing the policy’s ambiguity in favor of the insured, the term “officer” was limited to employees who had important executive and managerial duties, and not anyone whose job title included the term “officer.”  And fifth, the $140 million settlement was reasonable in view of Bear Stearns’ exposure and the probability that the Commission would prove its claims.

After Kokesh was decided on June 5, 2017, however, the Bear Stearns’ insurers asked the Supreme Court for leave to renew their previous motion to dismiss on the grounds that the New York Court of Appeals had previously held in this action that penalties were not insurable under New York law.[xii]  Judge Ramos responded, “[y]ou want an adjudication of this thing, make a motion before them. I’m not going to overrule the Court of Appeals,” and “[w]hether the SEC case is binding on them is their decision, not mine.”

The insurers accepted Judge Ramos’ invitation and appealed to the New York Appellate Division’s First Department.  The Court considered only whether insurers “should have been granted summary judgment dismissing the complaint because SEC disgorgement is an uninsurable penalty and not a ‘loss’ covered by the insurance policy.”[xiii]  The insurance companies, relying on Kokesh, argued that they had no obligation to provide coverage because the Supreme Court had conclusively defined the Commission’s disgorgement remedy to be a penalty and the policies provided that “loss” did not include “fines or penalties imposed by law; or … matters which are uninsurable under the law pursuant to which this policy shall be construed.”

The appellate panel found that Kokesh provided the “missing precedent” that established the Bear Stearns’ disgorgement payment was an uninsurable penalty as opposed to an insured “loss,” regardless of “whether it is linked to the wrongdoer’s gains or gains that went to others.”   The panel flatly stated:

The Supreme Court’s rationale as to the nature of disgorgement in Kokesh applies with equal force to the issue of whether the disgorgement paid by Bear Stearns, even if representing third-party gains, was a “Loss” within the meaning of the policy and whether public policy bars insurance companies from indemnifying insureds paying SEC disgorgement.  In both instances disgorgement is a punitive sanction intended to deter.[xiv]

The panel’s reasoning tracked Kokesh, including that to allow the wrongdoer to pass on disgorgement liability undermined its purpose.  The Court found that disgorgement can include both the wrongdoer’s unlawful gains and benefits that accrued to third parties.[xv]  In these situations, the status quo is not restored, but rather the defendant is left “worse off” than the place he would have occupied had he not violated the securities laws.  To the Court, the facts of this case clearly illustrated that disgorgement was punitive and not remedial: “if the $140 million portion of the disgorgement payment Bear Stearns seeks to recover reflects the gains of Bear Stearns’ customers rather than of Bear Stearns itself, it makes it more, not less, of a penalty.”[xvi]

What’s Left Unadjusted: Indemnification After J.P. Morgan’s Coverage is Denied

The panel’s decision aptly noted that “Kokesh has significance beyond the narrow issue of the statute of limitations.”[xvii]   The panel’s finding highlights the broad-reaching implications of Kokesh— it found that disgorgement was an uncovered “penalty” regardless of whether the claimant sought relief for disgorgement based on its own gains or those of related parties.  While this decision is arguably limited to the specific language of the insurance policy or to state’s that bar coverage for penalties as a matter of public policy, such language is common and insurers can be expected to cite this case when denying coverage for disgorgement going forward.

However, even with this guidance, the question of coverage for third party disgorgement in SEC settlements has not been definitively answered.  The insurance policies covering Bear Stearns excluded “fines or penalties imposed by law.”  Policyholders are likely to argue that disgorgement agreed to in a settlement or otherwise negotiated resolution is not a penalty “imposed by law,” but is rather an agreed-upon element of a compromise.  It remains to be seen whether any courts will agree and adopt this position.  Conversely, to negate any uncertainty about the impact of Kokesh, insurers could make the exclusionary language in their policies broader in scope. At a minimum, however, it is clear that entities and/or individual defendants – who are hit the most hard if they cannot seek indemnification from any source – now face more uncertainty about the insurability of their settlement payments.

Alternatively, will insurance companies offer policies explicitly stating that disgorgement will be covered to the fullest extent permissible under state law?  Is this something that insurance companies could use to gain a competitive advantage in the market place?  At least in New York, it appears that the onus will thus be on contract negotiation, settlement discussions, state law, and perhaps future litigation to determine if the courts, regulators, or the industry will define whether Kokesh clearly delineates disgorgement as a penalty in the insurance arena.

Beyond Indemnification: Impact on Investigation Timeline and Disgorgement Recovery

Outside of the insurance context, the Commission has been direct about Kokesh’s impact on its ability to seek or obtain disgorgement.  A few weeks ago, co-director of Enforcement Steven Peikin noted that according to a May 2018 calculation, the Commission has foregone approximately $800 million in potential disgorgement since the decision and expects that number to continue to rise.[xviii]  Accordingly, the Kokesh decision provides yet another incentive for the Commission to bring enforcement actions as quickly as possible and at least before the expiration of the 5-year statute of limitations.

Echoing this theme, the Commission’s Inspector General, Carl Hoecker, stated in his October 2018 report that “it is imperative that  Enforcement  uncover, investigate and bring cases as quickly as possible.”  He observed that  Enforcement missed its 2017 target of 65% of first enforcement actions filed within 2 years of opening an investigation, achieving 52% instead, a decrease from FYs 2012-2016.  To act more quickly, Hoecker explained that Enforcement is  “emphasizing expediency in quarterly case reviews, promoting best practices regarding efficiencies in various phases of the investigative process, leveraging data analytics capabilities, and conducting training on tools that expedite investigations.”[xix]  Given the complexity of its cases, limited resources and increasing oversight responsibilities over an expanding and changing securities market, striving for “real time enforcement” will continue to be a challenge for the SEC.  In the meantime, Kokesh will continue to impede the Commission’s ability to obtain monetary recovery for investors.

Conclusion

It has been over a year since the Supreme Court decided Kokesh and we are still spotting “Elephants in Mouseholes.”[xx]   With this decision, the New York courts have provided one answer to the question: “[c]an defendants and respondents still seek indemnification or insurance coverage for disgorgement and pre-judgment interest?”[xxi]  Responses to this decision by insurers and insureds will be worth watching: will additional disgorgement coverage become an angle to gain competitive advantage?  And how will all of this impact SEC settlement agreements, which generally prohibit indemnification for penalties?  The lack of indemnification for disgorgement will surely be a factor in a potential defendant’s consideration of whether to settle with the SEC and on what terms, but time will tell whether it changes the calculus to any degree.

Although there will undoubtedly be more to come on this issue, in the short term, companies should carefully review the definition of “loss” under their current insurance policies and determine whether they need to seek modifications and if so, the best time to do so.  The best time to do so may be sooner rather than later, as the SEC has already made clear that it will be using all available tools in an effort to bring its enforcement actions within the five year statute of limitations period.  Among all the uncertainty at least one thing is certain,  Kokesh’s reach goes significantly beyond  the SEC’s enforcement program and counsels in favor of careful reconsideration of other important factors that come into play – like insurance – when resolving an SEC enforcement action. 

[i] K&S Client Alert, Reflections on Kokesh v. SEC: Potential Ramifications of SEC Disgorgement Being a Penalty, (June 14, 2017) https://s3.amazonaws.com/kslaw-staging/attachments/000/004/567/original/ca061417.pdf?1498139481 (Kokesh “rejected the Securities and Exchange Commission’s longstanding position that disgorgement was an equitable remedy not subject to the five-year statute of limitations in 28 U.S.C. § 2462.”)

[ii] Id.

[iii] Id.

[iv] J.P. Morgan Sec. Inc., v. Vigilant Ins. Co., 2018 NY Slip Op 06146, No. 600979/2009 (1st Dept. Sept. 20, 2018); Kokesh v. SEC, 137 S. Ct. 1635 (2017).

[v] J.P. Morgan, 2018 NY Slip Op 06146.

[vi] See, e.g., State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Martinez, 26 Kan. App. 2d 869, 995 P.2d 890 (2000); Drexel Burnham Lambert Group, Inc. v. Vigilant Ins. Co., 157 Misc.2d 198, 595 N.Y.S.2d 999 (Sup. Ct. 2010).

[vii] The defendant insurance companies include Vigilant Insurance company, Federal Insurance Company, Liberty Mutual, Travelers Indemnity Company, National Union Fire Insurance Company, Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, and American Alternative Insurance Corporation. 

[viii] In the Matter of Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc., Securities Act Release No. 8668 (March 16, 2006), https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/33-8668.pdf

[ix] J.P. Morgan Sec. Inc. v. Vigilant Ins. Co., 2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 33799(U) (N.Y Cty. Sep. 13, 2010)

[x] J.P. Morgan Sec. Inc., v. Vigilant Ins. Co., 91 A.D.3d 226 (1st Dept. 2011)

[xi] J.P. Morgan Sec. Inc. v. Vigilant Ins. Co., 57 Misc. 3d 171 (2017).

[xii] Kokesh v. SEC, 137 S. Ct. 1635 (2017); Stewart Bishop Insurers Make Last-Ditch Kokesh Play In Bear Stearns Fight, LAW360 (June 6, 2016), available at https://www.law360.com/securities/articles/931944 (citing Letter to Judge Ramos, J.P. Morgan Sec. Inc. v. Vigilant Ins. Co., Index No. 600979/09 (June 6, 2017)).

[xiii] J.P. Morgan, 2018 NY Slip Op 06146.

[xiv] J.P. Morgan, 2018 NY Slip Op 06146.

[xv] SEC v. Contorinis, 743 F.3d 296, 302 (2d Cir. 2014).

[xvi] J.P. Morgan, 2018 NY Slip Op 06146 (The panel also rejected J.P. Morgan’s “law of the case” theory, whereby JPMorgan argued that Kokesh should not apply as the Court of Appeals previously rejected the defendants’ argument that the instant claim was not a loss under the policies and that a disgorgement of a third-party gain was  recoverable under an insurance policy.).

[xvii] Id.

[xviii] Steve Peikin, Co-Director, Division of Enforcement, Securities and Exchange Commission, PLI White Collar Crime 2018: Prosecutors and Regulators Speak: Remedies and Relief in SEC Enforcement Actions (Oct. 3, 2018)

[xix] Memorandum from Carl W. Hoecker, Inspector General to Jay Clayton, Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission regarding The Inspector General’s Statement on the SEC’s Management and Performance Challenges (Oct. 5, 2018)

[xx] SEC v. Jammin Java Corp., No. 2:15-cv-08921 SVW (MRWx), 2017 WL 4286180, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2017).;  K&S Client Alert, Reflections on Kokesh v. SEC: On the Lookout for “Elephants in Mouseholes”, (February 9, 2018) https://www.kslaw.com/attachments/000/005/640/original/ca020918.pdf?1518193236

[xxi] K&S Client Alert, Reflections on Kokesh v. SEC: Potential Ramifications of SEC Disgorgement Being a Penalty, (June 14, 2017) https://s3.amazonaws.com/kslaw-staging/attachments/000/004/567/original/ca061417.pdf?149813948]

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© King & Spalding | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

King & Spalding
Contact
more
less

King & Spalding on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide

JD Supra Privacy Policy

Updated: May 25, 2018:

JD Supra is a legal publishing service that connects experts and their content with broader audiences of professionals, journalists and associations.

This Privacy Policy describes how JD Supra, LLC ("JD Supra" or "we," "us," or "our") collects, uses and shares personal data collected from visitors to our website (located at www.jdsupra.com) (our "Website") who view only publicly-available content as well as subscribers to our services (such as our email digests or author tools)(our "Services"). By using our Website and registering for one of our Services, you are agreeing to the terms of this Privacy Policy.

Please note that if you subscribe to one of our Services, you can make choices about how we collect, use and share your information through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard (available if you are logged into your JD Supra account).

Collection of Information

Registration Information. When you register with JD Supra for our Website and Services, either as an author or as a subscriber, you will be asked to provide identifying information to create your JD Supra account ("Registration Data"), such as your:

  • Email
  • First Name
  • Last Name
  • Company Name
  • Company Industry
  • Title
  • Country

Other Information: We also collect other information you may voluntarily provide. This may include content you provide for publication. We may also receive your communications with others through our Website and Services (such as contacting an author through our Website) or communications directly with us (such as through email, feedback or other forms or social media). If you are a subscribed user, we will also collect your user preferences, such as the types of articles you would like to read.

Information from third parties (such as, from your employer or LinkedIn): We may also receive information about you from third party sources. For example, your employer may provide your information to us, such as in connection with an article submitted by your employer for publication. If you choose to use LinkedIn to subscribe to our Website and Services, we also collect information related to your LinkedIn account and profile.

Your interactions with our Website and Services: As is true of most websites, we gather certain information automatically. This information includes IP addresses, browser type, Internet service provider (ISP), referring/exit pages, operating system, date/time stamp and clickstream data. We use this information to analyze trends, to administer the Website and our Services, to improve the content and performance of our Website and Services, and to track users' movements around the site. We may also link this automatically-collected data to personal information, for example, to inform authors about who has read their articles. Some of this data is collected through information sent by your web browser. We also use cookies and other tracking technologies to collect this information. To learn more about cookies and other tracking technologies that JD Supra may use on our Website and Services please see our "Cookies Guide" page.

How do we use this information?

We use the information and data we collect principally in order to provide our Website and Services. More specifically, we may use your personal information to:

  • Operate our Website and Services and publish content;
  • Distribute content to you in accordance with your preferences as well as to provide other notifications to you (for example, updates about our policies and terms);
  • Measure readership and usage of the Website and Services;
  • Communicate with you regarding your questions and requests;
  • Authenticate users and to provide for the safety and security of our Website and Services;
  • Conduct research and similar activities to improve our Website and Services; and
  • Comply with our legal and regulatory responsibilities and to enforce our rights.

How is your information shared?

  • Content and other public information (such as an author profile) is shared on our Website and Services, including via email digests and social media feeds, and is accessible to the general public.
  • If you choose to use our Website and Services to communicate directly with a company or individual, such communication may be shared accordingly.
  • Readership information is provided to publishing law firms and authors of content to give them insight into their readership and to help them to improve their content.
  • Our Website may offer you the opportunity to share information through our Website, such as through Facebook's "Like" or Twitter's "Tweet" button. We offer this functionality to help generate interest in our Website and content and to permit you to recommend content to your contacts. You should be aware that sharing through such functionality may result in information being collected by the applicable social media network and possibly being made publicly available (for example, through a search engine). Any such information collection would be subject to such third party social media network's privacy policy.
  • Your information may also be shared to parties who support our business, such as professional advisors as well as web-hosting providers, analytics providers and other information technology providers.
  • Any court, governmental authority, law enforcement agency or other third party where we believe disclosure is necessary to comply with a legal or regulatory obligation, or otherwise to protect our rights, the rights of any third party or individuals' personal safety, or to detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or safety issues.
  • To our affiliated entities and in connection with the sale, assignment or other transfer of our company or our business.

How We Protect Your Information

JD Supra takes reasonable and appropriate precautions to insure that user information is protected from loss, misuse and unauthorized access, disclosure, alteration and destruction. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. You should keep in mind that no Internet transmission is ever 100% secure or error-free. Where you use log-in credentials (usernames, passwords) on our Website, please remember that it is your responsibility to safeguard them. If you believe that your log-in credentials have been compromised, please contact us at privacy@jdsupra.com.

Children's Information

Our Website and Services are not directed at children under the age of 16 and we do not knowingly collect personal information from children under the age of 16 through our Website and/or Services. If you have reason to believe that a child under the age of 16 has provided personal information to us, please contact us, and we will endeavor to delete that information from our databases.

Links to Other Websites

Our Website and Services may contain links to other websites. The operators of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using our Website or Services and click a link to another site, you will leave our Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We are not responsible for the data collection and use practices of such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of our Website and Services and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Information for EU and Swiss Residents

JD Supra's principal place of business is in the United States. By subscribing to our website, you expressly consent to your information being processed in the United States.

  • Our Legal Basis for Processing: Generally, we rely on our legitimate interests in order to process your personal information. For example, we rely on this legal ground if we use your personal information to manage your Registration Data and administer our relationship with you; to deliver our Website and Services; understand and improve our Website and Services; report reader analytics to our authors; to personalize your experience on our Website and Services; and where necessary to protect or defend our or another's rights or property, or to detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security, safety or privacy issues. Please see Article 6(1)(f) of the E.U. General Data Protection Regulation ("GDPR") In addition, there may be other situations where other grounds for processing may exist, such as where processing is a result of legal requirements (GDPR Article 6(1)(c)) or for reasons of public interest (GDPR Article 6(1)(e)). Please see the "Your Rights" section of this Privacy Policy immediately below for more information about how you may request that we limit or refrain from processing your personal information.
  • Your Rights
    • Right of Access/Portability: You can ask to review details about the information we hold about you and how that information has been used and disclosed. Note that we may request to verify your identification before fulfilling your request. You can also request that your personal information is provided to you in a commonly used electronic format so that you can share it with other organizations.
    • Right to Correct Information: You may ask that we make corrections to any information we hold, if you believe such correction to be necessary.
    • Right to Restrict Our Processing or Erasure of Information: You also have the right in certain circumstances to ask us to restrict processing of your personal information or to erase your personal information. Where you have consented to our use of your personal information, you can withdraw your consent at any time.

You can make a request to exercise any of these rights by emailing us at privacy@jdsupra.com or by writing to us at:

Privacy Officer
JD Supra, LLC
10 Liberty Ship Way, Suite 300
Sausalito, California 94965

You can also manage your profile and subscriptions through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard.

We will make all practical efforts to respect your wishes. There may be times, however, where we are not able to fulfill your request, for example, if applicable law prohibits our compliance. Please note that JD Supra does not use "automatic decision making" or "profiling" as those terms are defined in the GDPR.

  • Timeframe for retaining your personal information: We will retain your personal information in a form that identifies you only for as long as it serves the purpose(s) for which it was initially collected as stated in this Privacy Policy, or subsequently authorized. We may continue processing your personal information for longer periods, but only for the time and to the extent such processing reasonably serves the purposes of archiving in the public interest, journalism, literature and art, scientific or historical research and statistical analysis, and subject to the protection of this Privacy Policy. For example, if you are an author, your personal information may continue to be published in connection with your article indefinitely. When we have no ongoing legitimate business need to process your personal information, we will either delete or anonymize it, or, if this is not possible (for example, because your personal information has been stored in backup archives), then we will securely store your personal information and isolate it from any further processing until deletion is possible.
  • Onward Transfer to Third Parties: As noted in the "How We Share Your Data" Section above, JD Supra may share your information with third parties. When JD Supra discloses your personal information to third parties, we have ensured that such third parties have either certified under the EU-U.S. or Swiss Privacy Shield Framework and will process all personal data received from EU member states/Switzerland in reliance on the applicable Privacy Shield Framework or that they have been subjected to strict contractual provisions in their contract with us to guarantee an adequate level of data protection for your data.

California Privacy Rights

Pursuant to Section 1798.83 of the California Civil Code, our customers who are California residents have the right to request certain information regarding our disclosure of personal information to third parties for their direct marketing purposes.

You can make a request for this information by emailing us at privacy@jdsupra.com or by writing to us at:

Privacy Officer
JD Supra, LLC
10 Liberty Ship Way, Suite 300
Sausalito, California 94965

Some browsers have incorporated a Do Not Track (DNT) feature. These features, when turned on, send a signal that you prefer that the website you are visiting not collect and use data regarding your online searching and browsing activities. As there is not yet a common understanding on how to interpret the DNT signal, we currently do not respond to DNT signals on our site.

Access/Correct/Update/Delete Personal Information

For non-EU/Swiss residents, if you would like to know what personal information we have about you, you can send an e-mail to privacy@jdsupra.com. We will be in contact with you (by mail or otherwise) to verify your identity and provide you the information you request. We will respond within 30 days to your request for access to your personal information. In some cases, we may not be able to remove your personal information, in which case we will let you know if we are unable to do so and why. If you would like to correct or update your personal information, you can manage your profile and subscriptions through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard. If you would like to delete your account or remove your information from our Website and Services, send an e-mail to privacy@jdsupra.com.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Privacy Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our Privacy Policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use our Website and Services following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this Privacy Policy, the practices of this site, your dealings with our Website or Services, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: privacy@jdsupra.com.

JD Supra Cookie Guide

As with many websites, JD Supra's website (located at www.jdsupra.com) (our "Website") and our services (such as our email article digests)(our "Services") use a standard technology called a "cookie" and other similar technologies (such as, pixels and web beacons), which are small data files that are transferred to your computer when you use our Website and Services. These technologies automatically identify your browser whenever you interact with our Website and Services.

How We Use Cookies and Other Tracking Technologies

We use cookies and other tracking technologies to:

  1. Improve the user experience on our Website and Services;
  2. Store the authorization token that users receive when they login to the private areas of our Website. This token is specific to a user's login session and requires a valid username and password to obtain. It is required to access the user's profile information, subscriptions, and analytics;
  3. Track anonymous site usage; and
  4. Permit connectivity with social media networks to permit content sharing.

There are different types of cookies and other technologies used our Website, notably:

  • "Session cookies" - These cookies only last as long as your online session, and disappear from your computer or device when you close your browser (like Internet Explorer, Google Chrome or Safari).
  • "Persistent cookies" - These cookies stay on your computer or device after your browser has been closed and last for a time specified in the cookie. We use persistent cookies when we need to know who you are for more than one browsing session. For example, we use them to remember your preferences for the next time you visit.
  • "Web Beacons/Pixels" - Some of our web pages and emails may also contain small electronic images known as web beacons, clear GIFs or single-pixel GIFs. These images are placed on a web page or email and typically work in conjunction with cookies to collect data. We use these images to identify our users and user behavior, such as counting the number of users who have visited a web page or acted upon one of our email digests.

JD Supra Cookies. We place our own cookies on your computer to track certain information about you while you are using our Website and Services. For example, we place a session cookie on your computer each time you visit our Website. We use these cookies to allow you to log-in to your subscriber account. In addition, through these cookies we are able to collect information about how you use the Website, including what browser you may be using, your IP address, and the URL address you came from upon visiting our Website and the URL you next visit (even if those URLs are not on our Website). We also utilize email web beacons to monitor whether our emails are being delivered and read. We also use these tools to help deliver reader analytics to our authors to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

Analytics/Performance Cookies. JD Supra also uses the following analytic tools to help us analyze the performance of our Website and Services as well as how visitors use our Website and Services:

  • HubSpot - For more information about HubSpot cookies, please visit legal.hubspot.com/privacy-policy.
  • New Relic - For more information on New Relic cookies, please visit www.newrelic.com/privacy.
  • Google Analytics - For more information on Google Analytics cookies, visit www.google.com/policies. To opt-out of being tracked by Google Analytics across all websites visit http://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout. This will allow you to download and install a Google Analytics cookie-free web browser.

Facebook, Twitter and other Social Network Cookies. Our content pages allow you to share content appearing on our Website and Services to your social media accounts through the "Like," "Tweet," or similar buttons displayed on such pages. To accomplish this Service, we embed code that such third party social networks provide and that we do not control. These buttons know that you are logged in to your social network account and therefore such social networks could also know that you are viewing the JD Supra Website.

Controlling and Deleting Cookies

If you would like to change how a browser uses cookies, including blocking or deleting cookies from the JD Supra Website and Services you can do so by changing the settings in your web browser. To control cookies, most browsers allow you to either accept or reject all cookies, only accept certain types of cookies, or prompt you every time a site wishes to save a cookie. It's also easy to delete cookies that are already saved on your device by a browser.

The processes for controlling and deleting cookies vary depending on which browser you use. To find out how to do so with a particular browser, you can use your browser's "Help" function or alternatively, you can visit http://www.aboutcookies.org which explains, step-by-step, how to control and delete cookies in most browsers.

Updates to This Policy

We may update this cookie policy and our Privacy Policy from time-to-time, particularly as technology changes. You can always check this page for the latest version. We may also notify you of changes to our privacy policy by email.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about how we use cookies and other tracking technologies, please contact us at: privacy@jdsupra.com.

- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.