Though “insider trading” has long been recognized as an illegal and abusive way to cheat in the securities trading game, new potential forms of this activity have recently emerged. ...more
It is generally understood that it is unlawful to trade on nonpublic, market-moving information, or tips from someone with inside information—but what if the tip was not unlawful in the first place? When someone receives a...more
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 yesterday affirmed the insider trading conviction of the principal of a potential acquiror who, in breach of a nondisclosure agreement with a potential target company, had provided a tippee with nonpublic...more
On January 11, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the 2019 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in United States v. Blaszczak, which substantially broadened the scope of criminal insider trading...more
In light of recent news reports on stock trades made by certain senators after they received intelligence briefings on the COVID-19 crisis, we want to remind you of the provisions of the Stop Trading on Congressional...more
A lot of ink has been spilled over the crime of insider trading, which – in the view of U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff – “is a straightforward concept that some courts have managed to complicate.” In his recent decision in...more
Chapter 2: Insider Trading: Focus on Subtle and Complex Issues - Many hedge funds routinely face insider trading concerns as they trade equity or debt. Sometimes these issues are fairly obvious, such as where the fund...more
On June 25, 2018, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued a revised opinion in United States v. Martoma, No. 14-3599, Dkt No. 226. (2d Cir. Jun. 25, 2018) (“Martoma”). While the outcome for Matthew Martoma does not...more
On June 25, 2018, a divided three-judge panel of the Second Circuit amended its decision in United States v. Martoma. We previously reported on the facts of Martoma and the panel’s original decision, which held that the...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
In the perennial quest for alpha, investment managers have turned increasingly to big and alternative data for market insights. The most prominent consumers of this data on Wall Street are managers of ‘‘quant’’ funds, which...more
A divided Second Circuit panel (Katzmann, Pooler (dissenting), Chin) on Wednesday upheld the insider trading conviction of former SAC Capital portfolio manager Mathew Martoma. Confronting its precedent in United States v....more
Welcome to the 2017 Year-End Report from the BakerHostetler Securities Litigation and Regulatory Enforcement Practice Team. The purpose of this report is to provide a periodic survey of matters we believe to be of interest...more
On Aug. 23, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a split decision in United States v. Martoma, upholding a portfolio manager’s insider trading conviction and finding that a tippee need not...more
On August 23, 2017, a divided three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld the insider trading conviction of SAC Capital Advisors, LLC (“SAC”) portfolio manager Mathew Martoma. United...more
As noted in our December 9, 2016, Client Alert, the Supreme Court in Salman v. U.S. ruled that the required “personal benefit” to the person disclosing inside information (the tipper) does not need to be “pecuniary” or...more
On August 23rd, the Second Circuit issued its much-anticipated opinion in U.S. v. Martoma, affirming the 2014 insider trading conviction of S.A.C. Capital Advisors portfolio manager Matthew Martoma. In doing so, it clarified...more
The decision could alter the landscape of tipping liability. The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued another landmark insider trading opinion on August 23. In United States v. Martoma, the Second Circuit...more
On May 24, 2017, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) launched their latest criminal and civil salvos against prohibited insider trading by...more
In what appears to be the first appellate decision since the Supreme Court’s December 2016 ruling in Salman v. United States, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed an insider-trading conviction based on a...more
The Supreme Court’s decision in Salman v. United States, 137 S.Ct. 420 (2016) is already having an effect on the appeals arising out of the insider trading convictions in the Southern District of New York. Shortly after...more
In December 2016, the U. S. Supreme Court announced its decision in the closely watched insider trading case Salman v. US, ruling that if someone leaks confidential information to a friend or family member with the goal of...more
In Salman v. United States, decided on December 6, 2016, the Supreme Court upheld a conviction for criminal violations of insider trading laws. The Court, however, declined to adopt the expansive theories of insider trading...more
January 2017 - The last several years have seen law enforcement and regulatory bodies sharpen their focus on trading activity in the securities and derivatives markets. This focus has coincided with the advent of new and...more