Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
What Would We Do Without Them: Whistleblowers In The Era Of Sarbanes-Oxley And Dodd-Frank, Sean Griffith, Jane A. Norberg, Ian Engoron, Alice Brightsky, Tracey Mcneil, Jennifer M. Pacella, Judith Weinstock, Jason Zuckerman
What Would We Do Without Them: Whistleblowers In The Era Of Sarbanes-Oxley And Dodd-Frank, Sean Griffith, Jane A. Norberg, Ian Engoron, Alice Brightsky, Tracey Mcneil, Jennifer M. Pacella, Judith Weinstock, Jason Zuckerman
Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law
No abstract provided.
From Value Protection To Value Creation: Rethinking Corporate Governance Standards For Firm Innovation, Roger M. Barker, Iris H-Y Chiu
From Value Protection To Value Creation: Rethinking Corporate Governance Standards For Firm Innovation, Roger M. Barker, Iris H-Y Chiu
Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law
A company’s pro-innovation needs are often met by the exploitation of its resources, widely defined. The resource-based theory of the firm provides immense empirical insights into how a firm’s corporate governance factors can contribute to promoting innovation. However, these implications may conflict with the prevailing standards of corporate governance imposed on many securities markets for listed companies, which have developed based on theoretical models supporting a shareholder-centered and agency-based theory of the firm. Although prevailing corporate governance standards can to an extent support firm innovation, tensions are created in some circumstances where companies pit their corporate governance compliance against resource-based …
Mind The Gap(S): Solutions For Defining Tipper-Tippee Liability And The Personal Benefit Test Post-Salman V. United States, Matthew Williams
Mind The Gap(S): Solutions For Defining Tipper-Tippee Liability And The Personal Benefit Test Post-Salman V. United States, Matthew Williams
Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law
The Supreme Court’s decision in Salman v. United States reaffirmed (and indeed, clarified) the central holding of Dirks v. SEC that no additional pecuniary or reputational gain is needed when an insider gives information to a “trading relative or friend.” While this was considered a win for prosecutors, the Court chose to abstain from considering more complex questions regarding tipper-tippee liability. Namely, the Court provided no guidance on what constitutes a “friend” or “trading relative” nor how a tippee “should know” whether information was improperly disclosed. Without any clear standards, prosecutors and courts have wide discretion to determine whether these …