Account

Sign in to access your account and subscription

Fighting Retaliation Under Sarbanes-Oxley

In order to restore public confidence in the financial market, and to reduce the likelihood of future crises by ensuring that the public receives more information about possible corporate fraud, Congress enacted the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act of 2002, otherwise known as Title VIII of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the Act). To achieve its intended purpose, Congress included protection for employees of publicly traded companies who "blow the whistle" on their employers. Because the procedures, time limitations and standards of proof governing Sarbanes-Oxley Act retaliation claims are substantially different than those under state and federal anti-discrimination statutes that many companies are quite familiar with, companies and their counsel need to become aware of the differences.

13 minute read January 01, 2004 at 02:24 PM
By
Margaret A. McCausland And Christine Bonavita
Fighting Retaliation Under Sarbanes-Oxley

In order to restore public confidence in the financial market, and to reduce the likelihood of future crises by ensuring that the public receives more information about possible corporate fraud, Congress enacted the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act of 2002, otherwise known as Title VIII of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the Act).

This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

Adverse Possessor Provided Insufficient Evidence to Support TackingTown’s Installation of Guardrails Did Not Constitute a TakingMortgagee Entitled to Deficiency JudgmentLandowner Adequately Alleged Trespass During Renovation

September 01, 2026

How can legal teams move fast, reduce costs, and handle greater volumes of information? AI has rapidly become the de facto answer. But beneath the enthusiasm for AI, how are practitioners actually using AI-driven tools — and what are they learning as adoption shifts from experimentation to daily operations?

September 01, 2026

Notice of Pendency Provided Constructive Notice to Foreclosure Sale Purchaser

September 01, 2026