Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Administrative Procedure Act (1)
- Ambiguity (1)
- Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council (1)
- Dirks v. SEC (1)
- Disclosure (1)
-
- Fair Labor Standards Act (1)
- Federal agencies (1)
- History (1)
- Insider trading (1)
- Judicial neutrality (1)
- Labor unions (1)
- Legislative intent (1)
- National Labor Relations Board (1)
- Personal benefit standard (1)
- SEC v. Obus (1)
- Second Circuit (1)
- Securities and Exchange Commission (1)
- Statutory interpretation (1)
- United States Supreme Court (1)
- United States v. Newman (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Legal History
The Nlrb, The Courts, The Administrative Procedures Act, And Chevron: Now And Then, Theodore J. St. Antoine
The Nlrb, The Courts, The Administrative Procedures Act, And Chevron: Now And Then, Theodore J. St. Antoine
Articles
Decisions of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), like those of other administrative agencies, are subject to review by the federal judiciary. Standards of review have evolved over time. The Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 provides that administrative decisions must be in accord with law and required procedure, not arbitrary or capricious, not contrary to constitutional rights, within an agency's statutory jurisdiction, and supported by substantial evidence. In practice, more attention is paid to two Supreme Court decisions, Skidmore (1944) and Chevron (1984). For many years Chevron seemed the definitive test. A court must follow a clear intent of Congress, …
Dirks And The Genesis Of Personal Benefit, Adam C. Pritchard
Dirks And The Genesis Of Personal Benefit, Adam C. Pritchard
Articles
In United States v. Newman, the Second Circuit overturned the insider trading convictions of two hedge fund managers who received material nonpublic information from public companies via an extended tipping chain. The Newman court interpreted the Supreme Court's decision in Dirks v. SEC as requiring that the government prove: (1) that the tippee knew that the tipper was disclosing the information in exchange for a personal benefit; and (2) that if the personal benefit does not involve a quid pro quo to the tipper, that the disclosure arise from a "meaningfully close personal relationship" with the recipient of the …