Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
United States V. O'Hagan: Defining The Limits Of Fraud And Deceptive Pretext Under Rule 10b-5, Theodore C. Mccullough
United States V. O'Hagan: Defining The Limits Of Fraud And Deceptive Pretext Under Rule 10b-5, Theodore C. Mccullough
Seattle University Law Review
This Note argues that broadening the present embezzlement model of the Rule 10b- 5 misappropriation theory will more fully reflect both the language and intent of § 10(b) (of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act) and Rule 10b-5, and more importantly accommodate the sophistication of today's insider trading schemes. Part II of this Note examines the uses of inside information both prior to and after the creation of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act, and how § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 were created to proscribe these uses. Part III examines the language and intent behind § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 and argues …
"Disclose-Or-Abstain" Without Restraint: The Supreme Court Misses The Mark On Rule 14e-3 In United States V. O'Hagan, E. Livingston B. Haskell
"Disclose-Or-Abstain" Without Restraint: The Supreme Court Misses The Mark On Rule 14e-3 In United States V. O'Hagan, E. Livingston B. Haskell
Washington and Lee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Look Who's Talking: Defining The Scope Of The Misappropriation Theory After United States V. O'Hagan, Janet E. Kerr, Tor S. Sweeney
Look Who's Talking: Defining The Scope Of The Misappropriation Theory After United States V. O'Hagan, Janet E. Kerr, Tor S. Sweeney
Oklahoma Law Review
No abstract provided.
United States V. O'Hagan: Agency Law And Justice Powell's Legacy For The Law Of Insider Trading, Adam C. Pritchard
United States V. O'Hagan: Agency Law And Justice Powell's Legacy For The Law Of Insider Trading, Adam C. Pritchard
Articles
The law of insider trading is judicially created; no statutory provision explicitly prohibits trading on the basis of material, non-public information. The Supreme Court's insider trading jurisprudence was forged, in large part, by Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr. His opinions for the Court in United States v. Chiarella and SEC v. Dirks were, until recently, the Supreme Court's only pronouncements on the law of insider trading. Those decisions established the elements of the classical theory of insider trading under § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"). Under this theory, corporate insiders and their tippees who …