Search for: "Officer Oxley"
Results 81 - 100
of 1,090
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Sep 2016, 6:19 am
Sarbanes Oxley (SOX) imposes a watchdog role for GCs since corporate attorneys must report any potential violation to the chief executive officer and if the response from these officers is inadequate, then to the board of directors to stop any potential wrongdoing. [1] The reasoning behind the SOX-imposed requirement is that GCs have a moral obligation to society at large to set the corporation in the right direction. [read post]
9 Mar 2012, 9:17 am
Di Guglielmo have written a field manual to aid CLOs with their new tasks [occasioned by Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-frank]. [read post]
30 Nov 2006, 7:03 pm
Interestingly, however, the report strongly suggests that Sarbanes-Oxley is not the problem. [read post]
11 Mar 2014, 9:31 am
FMR argued that an “employee” must be limited to public company employees to avoid the “absurd” result of extending protection to the personal employees of company officers and employees. [read post]
16 Dec 2019, 3:14 pm
Ms Oxley occupied a room and shared communal space at a property that was formerly industrial offices, but had been somewhat adapted for occupation by property guardians, with lightweight partitions creating ‘rooms’. [read post]
25 May 2017, 6:19 am
Mar. 1, 2017), Maryland’s federal district court granted a motion to dismiss claims brought under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) and the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 by Samuel Olekanma, a corrections officer at the Jessup Correctional Institution (“JCI”). [read post]
30 Oct 2007, 5:42 pm
He had joined PCAOB in July 2003, and was its first CFO and one of the founding officers. [read post]
29 Dec 2010, 4:41 am
One wonders why the 112th Congress does not try to extend Sarbanes-Oxley to Congress and treat members as “signing officers” for the U.S. [read post]
14 Mar 2014, 2:00 pm
Department of Labor Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower web page. [read post]
31 Dec 2007, 2:54 am
Can you say "Sarbanes-Oxley" in Italian? [read post]
5 Feb 2007, 6:25 pm
The large number of shareholder suits that are filed every year alleging failure of the officers and directors to disclose properly the financial condition of their companies coupled with the increased stringency of financial disclosure requirements imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, creates a heightened level of concern for officers and directors who oversee financial disclosure. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 7:29 am
The former executive officer was not personally charged by the SEC for the company’s misconduct, however he is still required under Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) to reimburse CSK Auto for incentive-based compensation and stock sale profits that he received during the company’s fraudulent period. [read post]
23 Mar 2010, 12:10 pm
On March 17, 2010, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration ordered Tennessee Commerce Bank to reinstate a former chief financial officer and pay more than $1 million for violations of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. [read post]
23 Jan 2007, 7:34 am
Charles Schumer.The study suggests exempting some non-U.S. companies from the Sarbanes-Oxley corporate-governance regulations. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 7:59 am
The board members are inferior officers, and the method of appointment under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act violates the Appointments Clause. [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 5:01 am
In that earlier era, there was no Sarbanes Oxley Act and no Dodd-Frank Act, and there was no criminal money laundering liability. [read post]
22 May 2007, 3:13 pm
The enterprises are required to comply with several provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act regardless of their registration status with the SEC.For example, the Act requires the chief executive officer and the chief financial officer of an enterprise to review each quarterly report and annual report issued by the enterprise to certify that these financial statements fairly present the financial condition of the enterprise as required by section 302 of… [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 Mar 2007, 3:57 am
Sarbanes-Oxley delivered.” Spirited stuff, and he got it right. [read post]
5 Mar 2008, 10:26 am
" Also, interestingly, 65% of CFOs give credit to the compliance requirements of Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley in improving their companies' processes. [read post]
