Compliance into the Weeds - SOX Compliance, PCAOB Inspections and Audits
Compliance into the Weeds-Episode 57-SOX Reform or Not?
Compliance into the Weeds-Episode 51, the PCAOB and Compliance
Compliance into the Weeds-Espiode 47
Everything Compliance-Episode 12
Day 5 of One Month to Better Investigations and Reporting-the Board’s Investigation Protocol
Compliance into the Weeds-Episode 30-SOX 404(b)
FCPA Compliance and Ethics Report-Episode 145-SEC Enforcement of the FCPA, Part II
The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that proving an employer’s retaliatory intent is not required for whistleblowers seeking protection under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 144 S. Ct. 445 (2024),...more
Recently, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC holding that whistleblowers are not required to prove their employer acted with “retaliatory intent” to be protected under...more
On February 8, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 601 U.S. ___(2024), a case involving a former UBS employee’s claim that he was terminated for making an internal report...more
In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the whistleblower protections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the case, Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC et al. (February 8, 2024). The Supreme Court’s decision reaffirms an...more
Last week in a unanimous opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that an employee who sued his former employer for retaliatory termination did not need to prove a retaliatory intent behind the decision. Murray v. UBS...more
On February 8, 2024, the United States Supreme Court released a unanimous opinion confirming that a whistleblower does not need to show their employer’s actions were made with “retaliatory intent” to be protected under the...more
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
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
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
On February 8, 2024, the United States Supreme Court, in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, issued a decision that expands the ability of whistleblowers to seek anti-retaliation protections under federal whistleblower laws....more
The Supreme Court of the United States recently unanimously reversed the 2nd Circuit’s ruling on an employee asserting a retaliation claim under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“SOX”). Now, employees asserting a retaliation claim...more
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
On February 8, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that whistleblowers have a lower hurdle to clear to maintain their retaliation claims, even when they are terminated as a part of a company reorganization. The unanimous decision...more
2023 was another groundbreaking year for whistleblower litigation and bounty awards. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission shattered records by issuing a $279 million award and continued to actively enforce the...more
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
2021 was another blockbuster year in the whistleblowing and retaliation arena. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Office of the Whistleblower has now issued in excess of $1 billion in whistleblower bounties. ...more
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
On July 16, 2020, the Third Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a former IT analyst’s whistleblower retaliation claim, holding that he lacked an objectively reasonable belief that his complaints implicated one of the enumerated...more
On December 9, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that, as a matter of law, directors cannot be held liable under the anti-retaliation provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Zornoza v....more
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
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
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
On October 2, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania federal court denied a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss a SOX whistleblower retaliation claim, reasoning that Plaintiff sufficiently alleged...more
Whistleblower Developments is a periodic report covering significant cases, decisions, proposals, and legislation related to whistleblower statutes and how they may impact your business. Recent developments include: New...more