Search for: "Officer Oxley"
Results 361 - 380
of 1,089
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Nov 2013, 12:08 am
” In his retaliation lawsuit, Smith alleges that his whistleblowing reports are protected under both Sarbanes-Oxley and the Dodd-Frank Act. [read post]
30 Oct 2013, 8:00 am
Anderson Professor of Law and Values at University of Toledo College of Law Section 806 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”) enacted a protective scheme for workers terminated for blowing the whistle on corporate and securities fraud. [read post]
24 Oct 2013, 12:42 am
Meng-Lin Liu, a Taiwanese national, served as Group Compliance Officer for Siemens A.G. [read post]
23 Oct 2013, 1:24 pm
§ 78u-6(h)(1)(a), which prohibits retaliation against a whistleblower who makes disclosures required or protected by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, among other laws, does not apply extraterritorially. [read post]
23 Oct 2013, 1:24 pm
§ 78u-6(h)(1)(a), which prohibits retaliation against a whistleblower who makes disclosures required or protected by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, among other laws, does not apply extraterritorially. [read post]
23 Oct 2013, 7:03 am
His duties were limited to training and general process improvement projects, and special tasks overseen by a regional compliance officer. [read post]
18 Oct 2013, 9:00 am
The Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act is not unusual in providing that an officer of a corporation can be found personally liable to an employee for violating the Act if the officer knowingly permitted the corporation to violate the Act. [read post]
16 Oct 2013, 7:25 am
Due to their many variegated and unique relationships with public companies, said SIFMA, the consequences for SIFMA’s members would be particularly severe.Section 806 of Sarbanes-Oxley provides that no public company or any officer, employee, contractor, subcontractor, or agent of such public company may retaliate against an employee of such public company for engaging in protected whistleblowing activity. [read post]
11 Oct 2013, 8:13 am
CDTI and the former CFO each have 30 days to file an appeal with the department's Office of Administrative Law Judges. [read post]
9 Sep 2013, 4:14 am
FMR LLC, the Supreme Court will hear argument on whether "whistleblowers" employed by a privately held contractor or subcontractor of a publicly traded company are protected from retaliation by Sarbanes-Oxley. [read post]
31 Jul 2013, 4:04 am
For cashless exercises of stock options, due to Section 402 of Sarbanes-Oxley, we: - Don't allow Section 16 insiders to conduct cashless exercises at all - 10% - Don't allow Section 16 insiders to conduct cashless exercises through our plan's captive broker (so they have to use their own broker) - 7% - Don't allow executive officers to conduct cashless exercises through our plan's captive broker but do allow directors to - 2% - Allow Section 16 insiders to conduct cashless… [read post]
8 Jul 2013, 1:08 pm
Our attorneys are expert on all aspects of Sarbanes-Oxley as well. [read post]
27 Jun 2013, 3:09 am
Corporate officers and managers are not spared by virtue of their positions. [read post]
24 Jun 2013, 5:50 pm
Section 953(b) requires public companies to calculate and disclose, in every filing with the SEC, (i) the median annual total compensation of all of its employees other than its chief executive officer, (ii) its chief executive officer’s annual total compensation, and (iii) the ratio of those two numbers. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 1:05 pm
Same goes for you compliance officers! [read post]
3 Jun 2013, 1:24 am
Those are the types of carriers that a director or officer wants on his or her side. [read post]
23 May 2013, 4:23 am
This provision was required to be adopted by Congress in Section 306 of Sarbanes-Oxley to address the issue that employees of Enron had when they couldn't sell company securities because of a change in employee benefit plan administrators and Enron's share price was dropping significantly. [read post]
21 May 2013, 10:00 am
§ 78o(d)), or any officer, employee, contractor, subcontractor, or agent of such company, may discharge, demote, suspend, threaten, harass, or in any other manner discriminate against an employee in the terms and conditions of employment because of any lawful act done by the employee —The parties presented two differing arguments for the meaning: (1) FMR argued only employees of publicly held companies are covered, and the highlighted language means that they are protected… [read post]
15 May 2013, 9:00 am
Tomorrow, the Court will consider whether to accept an appeal by Jonathan Zang and Jackie Lawson in a case that has significant implications for the Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower protection provision, 18 U.S.C. [read post]
14 May 2013, 2:36 pm
FMR, 12-3, involves a First Circuit decision holding that the employee retaliation protections in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 18 U.S.C. [read post]
