The Justice Insiders Podcast: Jarkesy’s Implications for the Administrative State
Turning up the Heat – A Look at the FTC’s Groundbreaking Fine Against Bankrupt Digital Asset Services Provider Celsius Network LLC - The Crypto Exchange Podcast
Blue Sky Laws: Defending State-Level Securities Violations
The Justice Insiders: The Administrative State is Not Your Friend - A Conversation with Professor Richard Epstein
Four Decision Points in SEC Securities Investigations
Business and Legal Issues Around Blockchain and Cryptocurrencies
The "Compass Rose" Method for Corporate Witness Interviews
Podcast: Credit Funds: Compliance Considerations for Valuation
Life Sciences Quarterly (Q3 2019): SEC Enforcement and Class Actions Regarding FDA Communications
Insider Trading News - Ralph Siciliano discusses US v. Newman
SEC Whistleblower Program: What Employers Need to Know
The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that proving an employer’s retaliatory intent is not required for whistleblowers seeking protection under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 144 S. Ct. 445 (2024),...more
On February 8, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 601 U.S. ___(2024), a case involving a former UBS employee’s claim that he was terminated for making an internal report...more
In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the whistleblower protections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the case, Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC et al. (February 8, 2024). The Supreme Court’s decision reaffirms an...more
On February 8, 2024, the United States Supreme Court released a unanimous opinion confirming that a whistleblower does not need to show their employer’s actions were made with “retaliatory intent” to be protected under the...more
The Supreme Court resolved a circuit split on February 8, 2024, when it issued its opinion in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, holding that a whistleblower need not prove that the employer acted with “retaliatory intent” in...more
In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, the case arose after Trevor Murray, a research strategist for UBS, was fired shortly after reporting to his direct supervisor that he had been "improperly pressured" to "skew" business...more
The Supreme Court of the United States recently unanimously reversed the 2nd Circuit’s ruling on an employee asserting a retaliation claim under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“SOX”). Now, employees asserting a retaliation claim...more
Executive Summary: The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that a whistleblower under the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) is not required to prove the employer acted with retaliatory intent to prevail on a whistleblower claim....more
On September 25, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the Department of Labor’s Administrative Review Board’s rejection of an employee’s Sarbanes–Oxley Act (SOX) retaliation claim, holding the...more
On July 16, 2020, the Third Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a former IT analyst’s whistleblower retaliation claim, holding that he lacked an objectively reasonable belief that his complaints implicated one of the enumerated...more
The U.S. Supreme Court closed out its most recent term, which began in October 2017, with a number of high-profile and ground-breaking decisions. ...more
The Southern District of Florida recently denied a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss a former employee’s Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank whistleblower retaliation claims, finding that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged that she...more
...On July 25, 2017, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced it was awarding nearly $2.5 million to a government employee who tipped off the SEC to a company’s wrongdoing. Although the SEC does not...more
The Ninth Circuit recently affirmed a grant of summary judgment in an employer’s favor, dismissing a SOX and Dodd-Frank whistleblower retaliation case based on the plaintiff’s lack of an objectively reasonable belief of...more
On May 11, 2017, the Northern District of New York applied the Second Circuit’s standard for evaluating a Dodd-Frank retaliation claim in response to a motion to dismiss under F.R.C.P. Rule 12(b)(6). The court denied the...more
In Westawski v. Merck & Co., No. 14-cv-3239 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 18, 2016), the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted Defendant Merck & Co. (Company) summary judgment on Plaintiff Joni Westawski’s (Plaintiff) SOX whistleblower...more
On August 24, 2016, the Southern District of New York denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss a Dodd-Frank whistleblower retaliation claim brought by its former co-CEO and Executive Chairman of its Board of Directors, finding...more
On June 6, 2016, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the Minnesota District Court’s grant of summary judgment on SOX and Dodd-Frank whistleblower retaliation claims based on the plaintiff’s failure to establish a reasonable belief...more
In Nazif v. Computer Sciences Corporation, No. 13-cv-5498 (N.D. Cal. June 17, 2015), the Northern District of California granted Defendant Computer Sciences Corp. (Company) summary judgment on Plaintiff Nazif’s Dodd-Frank...more
A recurring question under the federal whistleblower laws is whether plaintiffs suing their employers for retaliation have the right to a jury trial. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act1 appears...more