Live Webcast/Rebroadcast - You watch the course online at the specified date and time shown below. You can ask questions and receive answers during the course.
On-Demand - You watch the course anytime and will have access to the course 24/7. Our On-Demand courses are available within 5-10 business days after the original recording and accessible for one year.
This program was recorded on February 14th, 2019
When the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Salman v. United States, it was anticipated that it would provide much needed clarity to the financial community, the S.E.C. and U.S. prosecutors as to what activity does and does not constitute insider trading. However, the cases filed and the court decisions issued since the Salman decision have shown that there is still a significant ambiguity regarding the nature of the “personal benefit” which must be received by the tipper of inside information and the requisite relationship which much exist between the tipper and tippee, in order for insider trading liability to attach. This ambiguity was highlighted most recently in the original and revised Second Circuit decisions in the case involving Mathew Martoma.
This program will discuss the holding in the Salman case as well as the earlier Second Circuit decision in U.S. v. Newman, and how those decisions affected the landscape of the law governing insider trading and government prosecutions which followed. We will then review the Second Circuit decisions in the Martoma case, and how the second decision impacts the current landscape. We also will explore the facts of recent indictments, the conviction of Billy Walters, and the case of Joseph Reggierri in which the SEC Commissioners affirmed the dismissal of insider trading charges brought by the SEC’s Enforcement Division. Each of these cases offers insights as to how the court and prosecutors are navigating the altered landscape in the law of insider trading.
Political intelligence, as a form of inside information, also has become a focus of prosecutors, as reflected in the indictment filed in the case of U.S. v. Blaszcak. We will explore this “new frontier” of insider trading liability, as well.