alerts & publications
Tipping Liability in the Wake of ‘Martoma II’9月 17, 2018
In “Tipping Liability in the Wake of ‘Martoma II,’” a bylined article by partners Nicole M. Argentieri, Andrew J. Geist, and counsel Robert Ennis, the authors take a critical look at what constitutes a “personal benefit” following cases Martoma I and Martoma II.
“Given the government’s apparent view that ‘a tipper personally benefits whenever the tipper discloses confidential trading information for a non-corporate purpose,’ we expect that courts will continue to wrestle with factual questions about the personal benefit requirement, and whether particular disclosures constitute a breach of a fiduciary duty. The evolving and uncertain case law in this area leave insider-trading defendants plenty of room to challenge the sufficiency of the government’s evidence that the insider’s disclosure was fraudulent and that the tippee knew it, especially in cases involving ‘remote tippees,’” the authors write.
Thank you for your interest. Before you communicate with one of our attorneys, please note: Any comments our attorneys share with you are general information and not legal advice. No attorney-client relationship will exist between you or your business and O’Melveny or any of its attorneys unless conflicts have been cleared, our management has given its approval, and an engagement letter has been signed. Meanwhile, you agree: we have no duty to advise you or provide you with legal assistance; you will not divulge any confidences or send any confidential or sensitive information to our attorneys (we are not in a position to keep it confidential and might be required to convey it to our clients); and, you may not use this contact to attempt to disqualify O’Melveny from representing other clients adverse to you or your business. By clicking "accept" you acknowledge receipt and agree to all of the terms of this paragraph and our Disclaimer.