News & Analysis as of

Securities Fraud Whistleblower Protection Policies Adverse Employment Action

Houston Harbaugh, P.C.

SCOTUS: Whistleblowers need not prove retaliatory intent under Sarbanes-Oxley Act

Houston Harbaugh, P.C. on

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

Goulston & Storrs PC

SCOTUS Issues Decision with Significant Implications for Future Whistleblower Cases

Goulston & Storrs PC on

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

The Volkov Law Group

Supreme Court’s Unanimous Decision Provides Important Protections for Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblowers

The Volkov Law Group on

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

Bricker Graydon LLP

Landmark Ruling Redefines Whistleblower Protection Under Sarbanes-Oxley Act

Bricker Graydon LLP on

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

Littler

SCOTUS: Retaliatory Intent Not an Element of SOX Retaliation Claim

Littler on

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

Holland & Knight LLP

No Retaliatory Intent Required? Despite the Headlines, Nothing New for Employers

Holland & Knight LLP on

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

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

No Retaliatory Intent Needed: SCOTUS Eases Requirements for SOX Whistleblower Claims

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP on

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

FordHarrison

U.S. Supreme Court Decision Could Make it Harder for Employers to Defend Whistleblower Claims

FordHarrison on

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

Proskauer - Whistleblower Defense

E.D. Pennsylvania Limits Protected Activity Under SOX

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

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

Federal Courts Take Divergent Approaches to Jury Trials for Whistleblower Plaintiffs Under Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley

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

10 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