In Dirks v. SEC, 463 U.S. 646 (1983), the United States Supreme Court found that a tippee may be liable for trading on the basis of material, nonpublic information if he or she knows that the tipper disclosed inside...more
The Second Circuit confirmed this week that a "meaningfully close personal relationship" is not required for insider-trading liability where a tipper discloses inside information as a gift with the intent to benefit the...more
Just in time for the annual season of work holiday parties and family gatherings, the United States Supreme Court unanimously confirmed that leaking material non-public information to a close relative who then trades in...more
In its first insider trading ruling in almost 20 years, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that a person can be held criminally liable for passing inside information to a friend or...more
A recent Supreme Court decision provides new guidance in the area of insider trading liability without personal benefit, and resolves an existing split between the Ninth Circuit and Second Circuit Court of Appeals. In Salman...more
On December 6, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its first insider trading decision in nearly two decades unanimously affirming the Ninth Circuit and holding that an insider’s “gift” of confidential information to a...more
Friends and relatives of corporate insiders who knowingly receive and trade on inside information now confront greater exposure for federal securities laws violations. On December 6, 2016, the Supreme Court held in United...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has clarified what constitutes illegal insider trading by making it easier for the government to bring such cases. In a Dec. 6, 2016, unanimous decision in Salman v. United States, the court held that...more
Today, the United States Supreme Court held that an individual may be convicted of insider trading after receiving an investment tip from an insider who obtained no direct financial benefit from the disclosure. In a unanimous...more
In its decision issued yesterday in Salman v. United States, 580 U.S. __ (2016), the United States Supreme Court unanimously affirmed a criminal insider trading conviction even though there was no evidence that the tipper...more
On December 6, 2016, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Salman v. United States, holding that a tipper’s gift of confidential, inside information to a trading relative constituted a sufficient personal benefit...more
Significant decision comes after nearly two decades of silence. For the first time in nearly 20 years, the US Supreme Court has weighed in on insider trading law and handed a victory to the government and its insider...more
A unanimous Supreme Court reaffirmed the “gifting” theory of insider trading under Dirks and rejected Newman “to the extent” it required more. The Court’s long-standing rule in Dirks v. SEC, 463 U.S. 646, 664 (1983)...more
Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court held that an individual may be convicted of insider trading after receiving an investment tip from an insider who obtained no direct financial benefit from the disclosure. In a...more
The Supreme Court confirmed today that the "personal benefit" required to establish a claim for insider trading can consist of making a gift of material, nonpublic information to a family member or friend and that an exchange...more
Since the Second Circuit Court of Appeals’ December 2014 decision in United States v. Newman, the government’s ability to aggressively pursue insider trading cases involving tipping has been in doubt. But, on October 5, the...more