News & Analysis as of

Hiring & Firing › Sarbanes-Oxley

Hiring & Firing refers to the process of recruiting, interviewing and offering employment and the process of evaluating performance and dismissing employees. Hiring & Firing is a highly regulated area and... more +
Hiring & Firing refers to the process of recruiting, interviewing and offering employment and the process of evaluating performance and dismissing employees. Hiring & Firing is a highly regulated area and can create tremendous liability for employers who fail to properly adhere to acceptable employment practices. Some of the potential pitfalls in this area stem from discriminatory hiring practices, improper performance evaluations, and retaliatory firings.  less -
Fisher Phillips

SCOTUS 2023/24 Lookback and Preview: 8 Key Rulings that Impact the Workplace and 4 New Cases for Employers to Track Next Term

Fisher Phillips on

The Supreme Court issued several momentous decisions last term that will have a lasting impact on employer practices. The Justices continued to shape the workplace law landscape by ruling on an array of issues involving...more

Littler

SCOTUS: Retaliatory Intent Not an Element of SOX Retaliation Claim

Littler on

The Supreme Court resolved a circuit split on February 8, 2024, when it issued its opinion in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, holding that a whistleblower need not prove that the employer acted with “retaliatory intent” in...more

Holland & Knight LLP

No Retaliatory Intent Required? Despite the Headlines, Nothing New for Employers

Holland & Knight LLP on

In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, the case arose after Trevor Murray, a research strategist for UBS, was fired shortly after reporting to his direct supervisor that he had been "improperly pressured" to "skew" business...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Protecting the Protectors: In Murray v. UBS, the U.S. Supreme Court Articulates the New Standard for SOX Whistleblower Claims

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

On February 8, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued its unanimous decision in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, concluding there is no implicit “retaliatory intent” requirement for whistleblower claims brought under the...more

FordHarrison

U.S. Supreme Court Decision Could Make it Harder for Employers to Defend Whistleblower Claims

FordHarrison on

Executive Summary: The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that a whistleblower under the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) is not required to prove the employer acted with retaliatory intent to prevail on a whistleblower claim....more

Polsinelli

Supreme Court Rules Retaliatory Intent Not Required Under SOX

Polsinelli on

In a groundbreaking decision, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled today in favor of whistleblower Trevor Murray, dispelling the notion that whistleblowers must prove retaliatory intent to be protected under federal law...more

Fisher Phillips

SCOTUS Predictions: Ruling in Whistleblower Retaliation Case Will Impact Employers’ Defense Strategy

Fisher Phillips on

Does a fired whistleblower need to show their employer acted with retaliatory intent to prove retaliation under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX)? The Supreme Court has been asked to review the standard of proof in such cases –...more

Fisher Phillips

4 Supreme Court Cases Employers Should Be Tracking as New Term Kicks Off

Fisher Phillips on

The Supreme Court just began a new term, and we’re watching several cases that will likely have a big impact on the workplace. Specifically, the Court will weigh in on whether someone can “test” violations of federal...more

Littler

Littler Lightbulb – May Employment Appellate Roundup

Littler on

This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment law developments at the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal in the last month....more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

The Second Circuit Creates a Circuit Split on Whistleblower Claim Standards

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In a decision with potentially wide-ranging implications for federal whistleblower protection law, the Second Circuit has held that plaintiffs who allege they were punished by their employers for whistleblowing activity, and...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Murray v. UBS: The Second Circuit Creates a Circuit Split on Whistleblower Claim Standards

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In a decision with potentially wide-ranging implications for federal whistleblower protection law, the Second Circuit has held that plaintiffs who allege they were punished by their employers for whistleblowing activity, and...more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

CA District Court: SOX and Dodd-Frank’s Whistleblower Provisions Do Not Apply To Individual Employed Abroad

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense on

On June 7, 2022, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, relying on recent ARB decisions, held that a plaintiff who lived and worked for a Canadian subsidiary of a US company could not avail...more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

CA Federal Court Dismisses Whistleblower Claims After Bench Trial

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense on

On July 26, 2021, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California held, after a bench trial, that Plaintiff Botta failed to prove that Defendant PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) terminated his...more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

M.D. Pennsylvania Grants Summary Judgment on SOX Retaliation Claim

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense on

On April 12, 2021, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania granted a defendant-employer’s motion for summary judgment on a SOX whistleblower retaliation claim, holding that the company demonstrated...more

Polsinelli

SDNY Rejects Director Liability for Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Claims, Creating a Split Among Federal District Courts

Polsinelli on

Public company directors, who are under constant threat of claims, received welcome news earlier this month.  On December 9, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that corporate directors...more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

ARB: “Hinting” at Filing a Whistleblower Complaint is Not Protected Activity

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense on

On October 31, 2019, the ARB held that an employee who merely “hints” that he or she intends to file a whistleblower complaint has not engaged in protected activity sufficient to invoke the whistleblower protection provision...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

ARB: No Protected Activity where Employee Inadvertently Informed Employer and Only “Hinted” at Filing Whistleblower Complaint

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: The DOL’s ARB rejected an employee’s SOX retaliation claim where he inadvertently provided information to his employer and only “hinted” that he was filing a SOX-protected complaint. The ARB seems unwilling...more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

SDNY Grants Motion to Dismiss SOX Retaliation Claim

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense on

On September 18, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted a defendant-employer’s motion to dismiss a SOX whistleblower retaliation claim, finding that the plaintiff failed to adequately...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

Second Circuit Issues Another Arbitration-Friendly Decision

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

On September 19, 2019, the Second Circuit issued a key pro-arbitration decision, which also decided issues of first impression about the Dodd-Frank Act (“DFA”) and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“SOX”). Daly v. Citigroup Inc. et al....more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

District of Rhode Island Dismisses In-House Attorney’s SOX Whistleblower Claim for Lack of Protected Activity

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense on

On July 19, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island granted an employer’s motion to dismiss a SOX whistleblower claim, holding that the Plaintiff—an in-house attorney—failed to allege sufficient facts...more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

Eastern District of Pennsylvania Grants Summary Judgment on SOX Claim

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense on

On July 18, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted a defendant-employer’s motion for summary judgment on a SOX whistleblower retaliation claim, holding that the Plaintiff did not have...more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

SDNY Dismisses SOX and Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Claims Against Private Company

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense on

On June 3, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted a defendant-employer’s motion for summary judgment on SOX and Dodd-Frank whistleblower retaliation claims, finding that the alleged...more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

Alabama Federal Court Denies Motion for Summary Judgement on SOX Whistleblower Claim

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense on

On April 2, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama denied a defendant-employer’s motion for summary judgment on a SOX whistleblower retaliation claim, finding genuine issues of material fact...more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

Ninth Circuit Affirms Most of Jury Verdict in Former GC’s SOX Whistleblower Lawsuit

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense on

On February 26, 2019, the Ninth Circuit affirmed much of a jury’s approximately $11M verdict finding that a former general counsel was discharged in retaliation for reporting alleged Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”)...more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

Fifth Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment on SOX Whistleblower Claim

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense on

On February 15, 2019, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of Andeavor Corporation f/k/a Tesoro Corporation on a SOX whistleblower claim, concluding that the plaintiff lacked an objectively...more

86 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4
Next »

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide