Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Like many aspects of insider trading law, the personal benefit test is deceptively straightforward. In tipping cases brought under the “classical” theory of insider trading, corporate insiders who disclose material nonpublic information, and persons who receive the information and trade based on it, are liable for securities fraud only if the tipper received a personal benefit in exchange for sharing the information. But almost 30 years after the test was first articulated, questions remain: Is the benefit test a separate element of liability or an aspect of another element, like breach of duty or scienter? And what counts as a sufficient “benefit”?
Those uncertainties have contributed to a greater controversy: whether the benefit test applies in tipping cases brought under the misappropriation theory. Prosecutors and regulators argue that it does not, and some courts have agreed. But careful examination of the purpose for the test and the requirements of misappropriation liability suggests that the government's opposition is misguided.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
A trend analysis of the benefits and challenges of bringing back administrative, word processing and billing services to law offices.
Summary Judgment Denied Defendant in Declaratory Action by Producer of To Kill a Mockingbird Broadway Play Seeking Amateur Theatrical Rights
“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.
Executives have access to some of the company's most sensitive information, and they're increasingly being targeted by hackers looking to steal company secrets or to perpetrate cybercrimes.