News & Analysis as of

Retaliation Burden of Proof Sarbanes-Oxley

Lathrop GPM

Lower Burden of Proof for Whistleblowers Established in Landmark Supreme Court Case

Lathrop GPM on

Recently, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC holding that whistleblowers are not required to prove their employer acted with “retaliatory intent” to be protected under...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

United States Supreme Court Endorses Low Burden of Proof for Whistleblowers

In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 601 U. S. ____, 2024 WL 478566 (2024), the United States Supreme Court (Sotomayor, J.) held that whistleblowers do not need to prove their employer acted with “retaliatory intent” to be...more

Jones Day

Supreme Court Holds Proof of Retaliatory Intent Not Required for Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Claims

Jones Day on

The Background: In August 2022, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC., et al. ("Murray") that an employee suing his employer under the anti-retaliation provisions of...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Endorses Low Burden of Proof for Whistleblowers

In a landmark unanimous ruling late last week, Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, et al. 601 U. S. ____ (2024), the U.S. Supreme Court held that whistleblowers do not need to prove their employer acted with “retaliatory intent”...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

U.S. Supreme Court to Clarify Whistleblower Statutes Regarding Employee’s Burden of Proof

The U.S. Supreme Court will soon decide whether a whistleblower must prove that an employer acted with “retaliatory intent” to be protected under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. In doing so, the Court will resolve a circuit split,...more

Kohn, Kohn & Colapinto LLP

Interpreting “Contributing Factor”: The Role of Retaliatory Intent in Upcoming Supreme Court Whistleblower Case

In the upcoming Supreme Court term, a pivotal employment case is on the docket: Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC. This case will dissect and evaluate a key element of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX), specifically regarding...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

California Supreme Court Clarifies Standards for Whistleblower Claims Under California Labor Code Section 1102.5

What Happened? Before last week, some courts had applied the standard in California Labor Code section 1102.6 to resolve whistleblower claims under California Labor Code section 1102.5, while other courts had applied the...more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

Alabama Federal Court Partially Grants Motion to Dismiss SOX Claim On Exhaustion Grounds

On May 29, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted a motion to dismiss in part Plaintiff’s whistleblower retaliation claims under SOX on the grounds that the Plaintiff failed to exhaust his...more

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

N.D. Indiana: Employer Bears Burden of Proving Whistleblower Exhausted Administrative Remedies

On February 1, 2016, the Northern District of Indiana ruled in a case brought under the Federal Railroad Safety Act (FRSA) that whether a whistleblower has fulfilled relevant administrative requirements prior to filing suit...more

9 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide