Search for: "Dirks v. SEC" Results 81 - 100 of 117
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Dec 2011, 11:36 am by Steve Bainbridge
Here, for example, is the certificate for a subordinated debenture issued by Equity Funding of America, the company that starred in Dirks v. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 12:22 pm by Steve Bainbridge
In light of the emphasis in Chiarella and Dirks that liability is premised on a duty arising out of a fiduciary relationship, the SEC lacked authority to adopt Rule 10b5-2 and a fiduciary duty is required. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 11:29 am by Joe Palazzolo
He pointed to the Supreme Court’s 1983 decision in Dirks v. [read post]
9 May 2011, 5:00 am by J Robert Brown Jr.
Insider trading for fiduciaries (directors of companies qualify) must meet the standard set out by the Supreme Court in SEC v. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 3:29 pm by Steve Bainbridge
Actually, the SEC has pretty consistently taken the position that a tiper who gets sexual benefits from the tippee has gotten the requisite personal benefits to satisfy the Dirks test: See, e.g., SEC v. [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 9:43 pm
(See e.g., on originality, Commission Staff Working Paper on the Review of the EC Legal Framework in the field of copyright SEC(2004)995, 14). [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 2:44 pm by Steve Bainbridge
This understanding of Dirks was implicitly confirmed by the Supreme Court’s more recent decision in United States v. [read post]