Interpretations And Implementation Of The Whistleblower Provisions Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Law
|
|
- Cameron Fowler
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Interpretations And Implementation Of The Whistleblower Provisions Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Law Irvin B. Nathan and Yue-Han Chow A. History Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Provision 1. Drafted principally by plaintiffs organizations to encourage and protect whistleblowers in reporting financial fraud by public companies, the Sarbanes-Oxley ( SOX ) whistleblower provisions were designed to prevent recurrences of the Enron debacle and similar threats to the nation s financial markets. 148 Cong. Rec. S7419, S7420 (daily ed. July 26, 2002). a. Ostensibly because corporate employees who report fraud [were] subject to the patchwork and vagaries of current state laws, even though most publicly traded companies do business nationwide, id. at S7420, Congress chose to enact these liberalized whistleblower provisions. Irvin B. Nathan is a senior litigation partner at Arnold & Porter LLP in Washington, D.C., who has defended a number of whistleblower suits brought under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Yue-Han Chow is a litigation associate in Arnold & Porter s New York office who has worked with Mr. Nathan in defense of those suits. A complete set of the course materials from which this outline was drawn may be purchased from ALI-ABA by calling CLE-NEWS and asking for customer service. (Have the order code SL027 handy.) Or order online at 5
2 6 ALI-ABA Business Law Course Materials Journal October 2006 b. As a recently enacted statute, many of the key provisions of SOX have yet to be interpreted by the Courts of Appeals. There are, however, a growing number of decisions by Administrative Law Judges ( ALJs ) in the Department of Labor ( DOL ) and by district courts that provide guidance for litigators. As can be expected, some of these de novo decisions are not completely consistent. 2. The statute, 18 U.S.C. 1514A, is largely based on the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century ( AIR21 Act ) and regulations promulgated under it, although a few unique features have been added to it. The SOX regulations can be found at 29 C.F.R. Pt The statute is stacked in favor of purported whistleblowers, making it difficult for companies to defend employment actions. There are a number of unique features in the law. a. Adverse employment actions are more than ultimate employment actions: they can include a hostile work environment, loss of job responsibilities, and placement on a lay-off list before lay-offs occur. b. Employees need only prove that the protected activity was a contributing factor to the employer s decision to take adverse employment action. This is based on the Whistleblower Protection Act, 5 U.S.C. 1221(e)(1) (1989), which applies only to Federal employees. Before the passage of the Whistleblower Protection Act, an employee had to prove that his protected conduct was a significant, motivating, substantial, or the predominant factor in a personnel action. See Marano v. Dep t of Justice, 2 F.3d 1137, 1140 (Fed. Cir. 1993). c. Companies have a heavier burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that they would have taken the same adverse employment action absent the protected activity. Employees need only prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the protected activity was a contributing factor to the adverse employment action. SOX follows the AIR21 Act in this respect. d. SOX allows the complainant to bring an action for de novo review in district court if there is no final decision within 180 days of filing the complaint. No other whistleblower statute allows for this. i. This is a very short and improbable amount of time for OSHAand the DOL to come to a final determination about the case. By a final order, the
3 SOX Whistleblower Provisions 7 statute apparently means the completion of a preliminary investigation, the ALJ proceeding, and a decision on any appeal accepted by the Administrative Review Board ( ARB ). ii. By the end of the 180 days, it is possible that the parties will have wasted a great deal of resources on the administrative proceeding, only to litigate in another forum. iii. A final decision is any decision made by the ARB or by the investigator or ALJ that has not been appealed or challenged. It is possible that an investigator will have rendered preliminary findings, an ALJ granted a hearing request, the ALJ heard the case and made a decision, the ARB accepted the case for review, and the parties will be waiting for the ARB s decision when the 180 days expire. Because there is no final decision, the complainant will be allowed to file an action in district court for de novo review, ignoring any determinations and decision made during the administrative process. This provision appears to be in urgent need of revision by Congress. 4. Appropriate Expertise? Though OSHA has experience with adjudicating whistleblower claims, determining whether an employee reported SOX violations is particularly tricky, because it involves allegations of financial malfeasance. a. As a Wall Street Journal article points out, OSHA investigators have been trained in health and safety issues. Deborah Solomon, Risk Management: For Financial Whistle-Blowers, New Shield Is an Imperfect One, Wall Street Journal, Oct. 4, 2004, at A1. The 13 other whistleblower statutes that OSHA enforces involve violations of federal laws concerning pollution, energy, nuclear power plant operations, and transportation. b. OSHA has not increased its staff of investigators to include those with a finance background; instead, the investigators received written materials on securities laws. B. Which Employers Are Covered? 1. Companies with a class of securities registered under section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 781) or that [are] required to file reports under section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78o(d)) are covered under the SOX whistleblower provision. 18 U.S.C. 1514A(a).
4 8 ALI-ABA Business Law Course Materials Journal October 2006 a. Subsidiaries, though they may not be publicly traded companies, may be liable under the SOX whistleblower provision if their parent companies are covered. Some ALJs have evaluated whether the subsidiary and the parent companies have a shared management and function, and an ALJ permitted a complainant to amend the complaint to include the parent when it found that there had been a mistake in identifying the responsible party. The same ALJ found that Congress intended to provide whistleblower protection to employees of subsidiaries of publicly traded companies, and there was a cause of action sufficient to withstand a motion for summary decision. See Gonzalez v. Colonial Bank, 2004-SOX-39 (ALJ Aug. 20, 2004); Morefield v. Exelon Services, Inc., 2004-SOX-2 (ALJ Jan. 28, 2004). b. If the complaint fails to name the public parent corporation, then an ALJ may dismiss the complaint. Despite the apparent legislative intent to attach liability to publicly traded companies who surround themselves by other entities under their control, it does not seem the Act provides a cause of action directly against the [non-public] subsidiary alone. Klopfenstein v. PCC Flow Technologies Holdings, Inc., 2004-SOX-11 (ALJ July 6, 2004) (rejecting argument that the holding company was an agent of the parent company); Powers v. Pinnacle Airlines, Inc., 2003-AIR-12 (ALJ Mar. 5, 2003) (ALJ found that the complainant did not justify piercing the corporate veil and that any complaint filed against the parent company would be untimely). c. A company that did not have a class of securities registered under section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and filed only reports required by section 15(d) of that Act owing to an indenture agreement with its lenders, was not covered by the SOX whistleblower provision. Flake v. New World Pasta Co., 2003-SOX-18 (ALJ July 7, 2003). d. Even if a company filed a registration statement with the SEC pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1933, if it sought to withdraw its registration and did not consummate an IPO, then it cannot be considered a registered issuer and is not subject to the SOX whistleblower provision. Roulett v. American Capital Access, 2004-SOX-78 (ALJ Dec. 22, 2004). i. If a company filed a registration statement with the SEC, but it had not become effective at the time of the adverse action, it is not considered a publicly traded company and is not subject to the SOX whistleblower provision. Stalcup v. Sonoma College, 2005-SOX-114 (ALJ Feb. 7, 2006).
5 SOX Whistleblower Provisions 9 e. If an employer became a publicly traded company only after it took adverse employment action against the employee, the SOX whistleblower provision cannot be applied to it retroactively. Roulett v. American Capital Access, 2004-SOX-78 (ALJ Dec. 22, 2004). i. There is no retroactive application of the SOX whistleblower provision. See McIntyre v. Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 2003-SOX-23 (ALJ Jan. 16, 2004); Gilmore v. Parametric Technology, 2003-SOX-1 (ALJ Feb. 6, 2003); Kunkler v. Global Futures & Forex, Ltd., 2003-SOX-6 (ALJ Apr. 24, 2003). f. However, if the adverse employment action was taken after the SOX Act became effective, then it will be covered, even if the whistleblowing activity happened before the SOX Act was passed. Lerbs v. Buca Di Beppo, Inc., 2004-SOX-8 (ALJ June 15, 2004). 2. Any officer, employee, contractor, subcontractor, or agent of such company who takes adverse action against a whistleblower can cause the company to be liable. 18 U.S.C. 1514A(a). a. OSHA stated that a respondent may be liable for its contractor s or subcontractor s adverse action against an employee in situations where the respondent acted as an employer with regard to the employee of the contractor or subcontractor whether by exercising control of the work product or by establishing, modifying, or interfering with the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment. 69 Fed. Reg. at 52,107 (Aug. 24, 2004). b. Individuals are also potentially liable for discriminatory action. 29 C.F.R. Pt c. When the publicly traded parent company has the authority to affect the employment of its subsidiary s employees or the subsidiary was a mere instrumentality of the parent company owing to its large amount of control, then the complainant is a covered employee. Collins v. Beazer Homes USA, Inc., 334 F. Supp. 2d 1365 (N.D. Ga. 2004); Platone v. Atlantic Coast Airlines, 2003-SOX-27 (ALJ Apr. 30, 2004). d. Employees of a non-publicly traded company who hold management positions and have the authority to hire and fire employees of a public traded company are considered officers of the publicly traded company under SOX. Kalkunte v. DVI Financial Services, Inc., 2004-SOX-56 (ALJ July 18, 2005).
U.S. Department of Labor
U.S. Department of Labor Administrative Review Board 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20210 In the Matter of: ANTONIO ANDREWS, ARB CASE NO. 06-071 NIQUEL BARRON, COMPLAINANTS, ALJ CASE NOS.
More informationPassing The Integrated Employer Test
Portfolio Media, Inc. 648 Broadway, Suite 200 New York, NY 10012 www.law360.com Phone: +1 212 537 6331 Fax: +1 212 537 6371 customerservice@portfoliomedia.com Passing The Integrated Employer Test Law360,
More informationThe Scope Of Protected Activity Under SOX
Portfolio Media, Inc. 648 Broadway, Suite 200 New York, NY 10012 www.law360.com Phone: +1 212 537 6331 Fax: +1 212 537 6371 customerservice@portfoliomedia.com The Scope Of Protected Activity Under SOX
More informationRecent Developments in Whistleblower Retaliation Litigation
Recent Developments in Whistleblower Retaliation Litigation Jason Zuckerman Zuckerman Law Washington, D.C. (202) 262-8959 jzuckerman@zuckermanlaw.com www.zuckermanlaw.com www.whistleblower-protection-law.com
More informationMinimizing Corporate Liability Exposure When the Whistle Blows in the Post Sarbanes-Oxley Era. Marc I. Steinberg* & Seth A.
Minimizing Corporate Liability Exposure When the Whistle Blows in the Post Sarbanes-Oxley Era Marc I. Steinberg* & Seth A. Kaufman** I. INTRODUCTION... 445 II. OVERVIEW... 447 A. Coverage... 447 B. Protected
More informationDOL Clarifies Burden-Shifting Framework For Whistleblowers
DOL Clarifies Burden-Shifting Framework For Whistleblowers Jason Zuckerman and Dallas Hammer The U.S. Department of Labor Administrative Review Board s Sept. 30, 2016, decision in Palmer v. Canadian National
More informationWhistleblower Law Update
Whistleblower Law Update Honorable J. Michelle Childs, US District Judge, Columbia SC Edward T. Ellis, Littler Shareholder, Philadelphia PA Alexis Ronickher, Katz, Marshall & Banks Partner, Washington,
More informationThe groundbreaking whistleblower protections
Corporate and Litigation Update NOVEMBER 9, 2004 Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Protections: First Cases and Recent Developments The groundbreaking whistleblower protections included in the Sarbanes-Oxley
More informationStatement of Richard E. Moberly Assistant Professor of Law Cline Williams Research Chair University of Nebraska College of Law
Statement of Richard E. Moberly Assistant Professor of Law Cline Williams Research Chair University of Nebraska College of Law Before the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections Committee on Education and
More informationWhistleblower Protections Under The Sarbanes-0xley Act: A Primer and a Critique
Whistleblower Protections Under The Sarbanes-0xley Act: A Primer and a Critique Introduction In the wake of scandals involving Enron Corporation, Arthur Andersen and other corporations, Congress enacted
More informationFordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law
Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law Volume 12, Number 5 2007 Article 2 Whistleblower Protections under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act: A Primer and a Critique Valerie Watnick Copyright c 2007 by the authors.
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 12-3 In the Supreme Court of the United States JACKIE HOSANG LAWSON AND JONATHAN M. ZANG, PETITIONERS v. FMR LLC, ET AL. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
More informationThe Whistle Just Keeps Blowing: Recent Developments in SOX Whistleblower Claims
The Whistle Just Keeps Blowing: Recent Developments in SOX Whistleblower Claims Connie N. Bertram 1 Proskauer Rose LLP Phone: (202) 416-6810 Email: cbertram@proskauer.com Whistleblower Blog: http://www.whistleblower-defense.com/
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS for the
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS for the FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT Case Nos. 04-2291 and 04-1801 (consolidated) RUBEN CARNERO, PLAINTIFF - APPELLANT, - v. - BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION, DEFENDANT - APPELLEE.
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit Nos. 04-1801 04-2291 RUBEN CARNERO, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION, Defendant, Appellee. APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
More informationWhistleblower Claims on the Rise
Preventing Whistleblower Claims in the Automotive Industry Jeff Kopp 313-234-7140 jkopp@foley.com Felicia O Connor 313-234-7172 foconnor@foley.com Attorney Advertising Prior results do not guarantee a
More information2nd Proofs 8/24/2017. Whistleblower Protections of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of Chapter 13.
Chapter 13 Whistleblower Protections of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 13:1 Introduction 13:2 Statute of Limitations 13:3 Who Is Covered? 13:3.1 Non-Federal Employer 13:3.2 Employees
More informationWHISTLEBLOWER LAW DEVELOPMENTS Fifth Circuit Defines Whistleblower Narrowly Under Dodd-Frank Posted on July 18, 2013 by Renee Phillips and Mike Delikat On July 17, 2013, the Fifth Circuit issued the first
More information2017 Renne Sloan Holtzman Sakai Public Law Group 1
Employee as Whistleblower: How Do You Manage? CALPELRA Annual Conference, December 6, 2017 Presented By Jeff Sloan and Linda Ross How to Identify Whistleblowing Whistleblower Defined According to Merriam-Webster,
More informationEMPLOYMENT. Westlaw Journal Formerly Andrews Litigation Reporter
Westlaw Journal Formerly Andrews Litigation Reporter EMPLOYMENT Litigation News and Analysis Legislation Regulation Expert Commentary VOLUME 25, ISSUE 12 / JANUARY 11, 2011 Expert Analysis Raising the
More informationGregory Keating. Practice Group Leader PRACTICE FOCUS. EDUCATION Boston College Law School JD, 1993, cum laude. Trinity College BA, 1987
Gregory Keating Practice Group Leader T +1 (617) 248-5065 gkeating@choate.com a respected expert in the defense of whistle-blower claims and for his phenomenal expertise representing clients in the education
More informationSecond and Fifth Circuits Split on Who is Entitled to Whistleblower Protection Under Dodd-Frank
H Reprinted with permission from the Employee Relations LAW JOURNAL Vol. 41, No. 4 Spring 2016 SPLIT CIRCUITS Second and Fifth Circuits Split on Who is Entitled to Whistleblower Protection Under Dodd-Frank
More informationThe Whistleblower Provision of Sarbanes-Oxley: Discerning the Scope of "Protected Activity"
Hofstra Labor and Employment Law Journal Volume 24 Issue 1 Article 5 2006 The Whistleblower Provision of Sarbanes-Oxley: Discerning the Scope of "Protected Activity" Robert P. Riordan Leslie E. Wood Follow
More informationNASD OFFICE OF HEARING OFFICERS
NASD OFFICE OF HEARING OFFICERS DEPARTMENT OF ENFORCEMENT, v. Complainant, Disciplinary Proceeding No. CLI050016 Hearing Officer DMF Respondent. ORDER DENYING RESPONDENT S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY HEARING
More informationDodd-Frank Whistleblower Provision
U.S. Supreme Court Holds That Dodd-Frank Act s Whistleblower Provisions Cover Persons Who Report Concerns to the SEC, Not Those Who Exclusively Report Internally. SUMMARY In Digital Realty Trust, Inc.
More informationIn the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
CASE NO. 15-1035 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit WILLIAM M. CONRAD, Plaintiff - Appellant v. CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., Defendant Appellee On Appeal From the United States District
More informationWebMemo22. Congress Should Repeal or Fix Section 404 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act to Help Create Jobs. Published by The Heritage Foundation
No. 3380 WebMemo22 Published by The Heritage Foundation Congress Should Repeal or Fix Section 404 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act to Help Create Jobs David S. Addington Americans need jobs. The private sector
More informationOSHA to Offer Alternative Dispute Resolution for Whistleblower Complaints
November 12, 2012 OSHA to Offer Alternative Dispute Resolution for Whistleblower Complaints Employers should evaluate whether new whistleblower complaints are eligible for the initiative, which provides
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ROBERT REICHERT, an individual, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 06-15503 NATIONAL CREDIT SYSTEMS, INC., a D.C. No. foreign corporation doing
More informationWhat s Next for the Department s Borrower Defense Rule?
What s Next for the Department s Borrower Defense Rule? AARON LACEY PARTNER, HIGHER EDUCATION PRACTICE THOMPSON COBURN LLP Aaron D. Lacey o Partner, Higher Education Practice, Thompson Coburn LLP. Higher
More informationWhat the Supreme Court s Whistleblower Decision Means for Companies
Latham & Watkins White Collar Defense and Investigations, Securities Litigation & Professional Liability, and Supreme Court and Appellate Practices February 28, 2018 Number 2284 What the Supreme Court
More informationCorporate Must Reads. Making sense of it all.
e-book March 2014 Corporate Must Reads. Making sense of it all. Table of contents U.S. Supreme Court extends whistleblower protection to employees of a public company s private contractors...3 SEC issues
More informationClient Update Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Dodd-Frank s Whistleblower Protections
1 Client Update Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Dodd-Frank s Whistleblower Protections The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on February 21, 2018 that the Dodd-Frank Act s anti-retaliation provision only protects
More informationPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No
PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1106 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, v. BALTIMORE COUNTY, and Plaintiff - Appellee, Defendant Appellant, AMERICAN FEDERATION
More informationEmployee Whistleblower Claims Under SOX: Preparing for New OSHA Enforcement Avoiding and Defending Worker Retaliation Claims
presents Employee Whistleblower Claims Under SOX: Preparing for New OSHA Enforcement Avoiding and Defending Worker Retaliation Claims A Live 90-Minute Teleconference/Webinar with Interactive Q&A Today's
More informationFlorida Hospital has had a provider agreement with HMHS since at least April 2005, and is part of its TRICARE provider network.
CLIENT ALERT U.S. Department of Labor Administrative Review Board Reverses Prior Ruling and Holds that a Tricare Network Provider is a "Subcontractor" Under OFCCP Regulations Jul.30.2013 On July 22, 2013,
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 12-3 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States JACKIE HOSANG LAWSON AND JONATHAN M. ZANG, V. FMR LLC, ET AL., Petitioners, Respondents. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for
More informationDepartment of Labor Reverses Course: Mortgage Loan Officers Do Not Meet the Administrative Exemption s Requirements
A Timely Analysis of Legal Developments A S A P In This Issue: March 2010 In a development that may have significant implications for mortgage lenders and other financial services employers, the Department
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit MORRIS SHELKOFSKY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee. 2013-5083 Appeal from the
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FELICIA D. DAVIS, for herself and for all others similarly situated, No. 07-56236 Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. v. CV-07-02786-R PACIFIC
More informationALI-ABA Course of Study ERISA Litigation. February 14-16, 2008 Scottsdale, Arizona. Litigation Against Plan Service Providers
183 ALI-ABA Course of Study ERISA Litigation February 14-16, 2008 Scottsdale, Arizona Litigation Against Plan Service Providers By Thomas S. Gigot Groom Law Group Washington, D.C. 184 2 185 Overview Since
More informationLaw Office of W. Mark Scott, PLLC
The Resurgence of Whistleblowers in IRS Bond Enforcement By: W. Mark Scott I. THERE AND BACK AGAIN The IRS Office of Tax Exempt Bonds received a significant number of whistleblower tips during my tenure
More informationA Year For Whistleblower Rewards And Protections
Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com A Year For Whistleblower Rewards And Protections Law360,
More informationUpdates and Trends within Professional Liability: Financial Services
Updates and Trends within Professional Liability: Financial Services FINRA STATISTICS 2013: Filings are down 22% for First Quarter 2013 (compared to 2012) 38% of cases taken to hearing resulted in a customer
More informationWhistleblowing in the Dodd- Frank Era: The Perfect Storm
Whistleblowing in the Dodd- Frank Era: The Perfect Storm February 2017 Renee Phillips Orrick (212) 506-5153 rphillips@orrick.com The Perfect Storm of Whistleblower Activity Massive statutory and regulatory
More informationWHISTLEBLOWER RETALIATION AND DOCUMENT DESTRUCTION: BEWARE
WHISTLEBLOWER RETALIATION AND DOCUMENT DESTRUCTION: BEWARE THE CIVIL AND CRIMINAL SANCTIONS OF SARBANES-OXLEY Paul D. Frederickson In the last decade of the twentieth century, the economy and financial
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
Case 4:16-cv-00325-CWD Document 50 Filed 11/15/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION, vs. Plaintiff IDAHO HYPERBARICS, INC., as Plan
More informationTarget Date Funds Platform Investment Options
Target Date Funds Platform Investment Options The Evolving Tension Between Property Rights and Union Access Rights The California Experience By: Ted Scott and Sara B. Kalis, Littler Mendelson Kim Zeldin,
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
NOTE: Pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 47.6, this disposition is not citable as precedent. It is a public record. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 04-3376 JAMES A. KOKKINIS, v. Petitioner,
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Case: 13-16588, 11/09/2015, ID: 9748489, DktEntry: 30-1, Page 1 of 7 FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Counter-defendant- Appellee,
More information119 T.C. No. 5 UNITED STATES TAX COURT. JOSEPH M. GREY PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT, P.C., Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
119 T.C. No. 5 UNITED STATES TAX COURT JOSEPH M. GREY PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT, P.C., Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 4789-00. Filed September 16, 2002. This is an action
More information13(c) Issues in Contracting and Reduction of Transit Services. Jane Sutter Starke Thompson Coburn LLP February 23, 2010
13(c) Issues in Contracting and Reduction of Transit Services Jane Sutter Starke Thompson Coburn LLP February 23, 2010 Contracted Services (a) outsourcing new services or publicly operated services to
More informationUNITED STATES OF AMERICA MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD 2006 MSPB 29. Docket No. DC I-1. Marc A. Garcia, Appellant, Department of State,
OPINION AND ORDER UNITED STATES OF AMERICA MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD 2006 MSPB 29 Docket No. DC-3443-05-0216-I-1 Marc A. Garcia, Appellant, v. Department of State, Agency. February 27, 2006 Gregory
More informationAFFIRMATION IN SUPPORT -against- : : ABEX CORPORATION, et al., : : Defendants. : : X
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE DIVISION: FIRST DEPARTMENT -------------------------------------------------------X : RAYMOND FINERTY and : MARY FINERTY, : INDEX NO. 190187/10 : Plaintiffs,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 2:17-cv RLR. versus
Case: 18-11098 Date Filed: 04/09/2019 Page: 1 of 14 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 18-11098 D.C. Docket No. 2:17-cv-14222-RLR MICHELINA IAFFALDANO,
More informationOffice of the Comptroller v. Jetstream Maintenance Corp. OATH Index No. 997/11 (Jan. 24, 2011), adopted, Comptroller s Dec. (Apr. 28, 2011), appended
Office of the Comptroller v. Jetstream Maintenance Corp. OATH Index No. 997/11 (Jan. 24, 2011), adopted, Comptroller s Dec. (Apr. 28, 2011), appended Following respondents default, petitioner proved violation
More information137 T.C. No. 4 UNITED STATES TAX COURT. KENNETH WILLIAM KASPER, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
137 T.C. No. 4 UNITED STATES TAX COURT KENNETH WILLIAM KASPER, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 13399-10W. Filed July 12, 2011. On Jan. 29, 2009, P filed with R a claim
More informationMEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Case 3:17-cv-00295-SMY-DGW Document 37 Filed 07/11/18 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #186 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. IYMAN FARIS,
More informationCase: 1:13-cv Document #: 59 Filed: 05/27/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:392
Case: 1:13-cv-03094 Document #: 59 Filed: 05/27/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:392 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ELENA FRIDMAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) No. 13 C 03094
More informationARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of -- ) ) Allison Transmission, Inc. ) ) Under Contract No. DAAE07-99-C-N031 ) APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 59204
More informationCase 9:00-cv TCP-AKT Document 244 Filed 08/07/2006 Page 1 of 17. In Re METLIFE CV
Case 9:00-cv-02258-TCP-AKT Document 244 Filed 08/07/2006 Page 1 of 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------X In Re METLIFE CV 00-2258
More informationARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS. Appeal of -- ) ) Giuliani Associates, Inc. ) ASBCA No ) Under Contract No.
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of -- ) ) Giuliani Associates, Inc. ) ASBCA No. 51672 ) Under Contract No. NAS5-96139 ) APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: APPEARANCE FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Herman
More informationHOT ISSUES IN CIVIL ASSET FORFEITURES. Stephen J. Dunn 1. funds on deposit at the bank. Cash needed to operate the business and pay
HOT ISSUES IN CIVIL ASSET FORFEITURES Stephen J. Dunn 1 A business receives a call from its bank that the IRS has seized all of the business funds on deposit at the bank. Cash needed to operate the business
More informationPatrick D. Easterling, Appellant, v. United States Postal Service, Agency.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD 2008 MSPB 214 Docket No. AT-0752-08-0292-I-1 Patrick D. Easterling, Appellant, v. United States Postal Service, Agency. September 19, 2008 John R.
More information15 - First Circuit Determines When IRS Willfully Violates Bankruptcy Discharge Order
15 - First Circuit Determines When IRS Willfully Violates Bankruptcy Discharge Order IRS v. Murphy, (CA 1, 6/7/2018) 121 AFTR 2d 2018-834 The Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, affirming the district
More informationDIRECTORS AND OFFICERS LIABILITY ERISA ENTERS THE SPOTLIGHT
DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS LIABILITY ERISA ENTERS THE SPOTLIGHT JOSEPH M. MCLAUGHLIN * SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP DECEMBER 9, 2004 Directors of public companies and their advisers have long understood
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION RICHARD BARNES, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 4:13-cv-0068-DGK ) HUMANA, INC., ) ) Defendant. ) ORDER GRANTING DISMISSAL
More informationARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS. Appeal of -- ) ) The Swanson Group, Inc. ) ASBCA No ) Under Contract No. N C-9509 )
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of -- ) ) The Swanson Group, Inc. ) ASBCA No. 54863 ) Under Contract No. N68711-91-C-9509 ) APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT:
More informationCase , Document 87-1, 03/11/2015, , Page1 of 10. (Argued: September 29, 2014 Decided: March 11, 2015)
Case -0, Document -, 0//0, 0, Page of 0-0-ag Stryker v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 0 0 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 0 (Argued: September, 0 Decided: March,
More informationThe Salcido Report. False Claims Act Public Disclosure Alert. If you read one thing...
The Salcido Report September 25, 2015 If you read one thing... Launch of a new False Claims Act (FCA) resource The Public Disclosure Alert (PDA) provides expert analysis of latest paradigm shifting FCA
More informationSEVENTH CIRCUIT ADOPTS NEW STANDARD FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW OF MUTUAL FUND ADVISORY FEES
CLIENT MEMORANDUM SEVENTH CIRCUIT ADOPTS NEW STANDARD FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW OF MUTUAL FUND ADVISORY FEES In a recent opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit adopted a new standard of judicial
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit BONNIE J. RUSICK, Claimant-Appellant, v. SLOAN D. GIBSON, Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee. 2013-7105 Appeal from the United
More informationNovember 1, 2010 NEW ROBUST RETALIATION PROTECTIONS FOR WHISTLEBLOWERS
NEW ROBUST RETALIATION PROTECTIONS FOR WHISTLEBLOWERS Debra S. Katz 1 Matthew Stiff Katz, Marshall & Banks, LLP 1718 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Sixth Floor Washington, DC 20009 (202) 299-1140 katz@kmblegal.com
More informationCase 1:00-cv RBW Document 249 Filed 06/11/15 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:00-cv-02502-RBW Document 249 Filed 06/11/15 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ROSEMARY LOVE, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Case Number: 1:00CV02502 vs.
More informationPLAN DISTRIBUTION AND ROLLOVER GUIDANCE AFTER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE V. US DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
PLAN DISTRIBUTION AND ROLLOVER GUIDANCE AFTER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE V. US DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AN ANALYSIS OF THE DESERET LETTER September 2018 www.morganlewis.com This White Paper is provided for your convenience
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE EASTERN DIVISION. v. No. 1:12-cv JDB-egb
United States of America v. $225,300.00 in U.S. Funds fro...n the Name of Norene Pumphrey et al Doc. 20 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT
More informationPOINT/COUNTERPOINT ON THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002: A VIEW FROM THE EMPLOYER S AND EMPLOYEE S PERSPECTIVES
POINT/COUNTERPOINT ON THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002: A VIEW FROM THE EMPLOYER S AND EMPLOYEE S PERSPECTIVES Employer s Perspective By: William John Bux Miranda R. Tolar Employee s Perspective By: Joseph
More informationDisclosure of Environmental Liabilities: SEC Obligations, Auditing Standards, and the Effect of Sarbanes-Oxley
2177 Twenty First Annual Advanced ALI-ABA Course of Study The Impact of Environmental Law on Real Estate Transactions: Brownfields and Beyond October 2-3, 2008 Boston, Massachusetts Disclosure of Environmental
More informationLEGAL ALERT. March 17, Sutherland SEC/FINRA Litigation Study Shows It Sometimes Pays to Take on Regulators
LEGAL ALERT March 17, 2011 Sutherland SEC/FINRA Litigation Study Shows It Sometimes Pays to Take on Regulators Whenever firms and individuals are faced with SEC and FINRA investigations and enforcement
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 5:16-cv JSM-PRL
Case: 16-17126 Date Filed: 09/22/2017 Page: 1 of 12 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 16-17126 D.C. Docket No. 5:16-cv-00387-JSM-PRL STACEY HART, versus CREDIT
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE TAX COURT COMMITTEE ON OPINIONS
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE TAX COURT COMMITTEE ON OPINIONS : MERRILL LYNCH CREDIT : TAX COURT OF NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, : DOCKET NO: 004230-2017 : Plaintiff, : : vs. : : DIRECTOR, DIVISION
More informationUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH LAW REVIEW Vol. 75 Winter 2013
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH LAW REVIEW Vol. 75 Winter 2013 WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE AND WHY: AN EXAMINATION OF ASADI V. G.E. ENERGY AND THE DODD-FRANK ANTI-RETALIATION PROVISION Calvin Kennedy This work is
More informationJanuary 2005 Bulletin Labor Department Issues Guidance on Fiduciary Responsibilities of Directed Trustees
January 2005 Bulletin 05-01 Labor Department Issues Guidance on Fiduciary Responsibilities of Directed Trustees If you have questions or would like additional information on the material covered in this
More informationCoverage Issues Relating To Claims Under The False Claims Act
Coverage Issues Relating To Claims Under The False Claims Act May 2, 2017 Stephen A. Wood Chuhak & Tecson, P.C. 30 South Wacker, Ste 2600 Chicago, IL 60606 swood@ Direct Dial: 312-201-3400 Facsimile: 312-444-9027
More informationCase 8:08-cv SCB-TGW Document 23 Filed 11/19/2009 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
Case 8:08-cv-02396-SCB-TGW Document 23 Filed 11/19/2009 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION LAUREN FRAZIER, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 8:08-cv 02396 T 24 TGW
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
USCA Case #17-7003 Document #1710165 Filed: 12/22/2017 Page 1 of 11 United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued November 13, 2017 Decided December 22, 2017 No. 17-7003 UNITED
More informationTenth Circuit Affirms Ruling Allowing SEC to Bring Securities Fraud Claims Over Certain Foreign Transactions
Tenth Circuit Affirms Ruling Allowing SEC to Bring Securities Fraud Claims Over Certain Foreign Transactions January 30, 2019 Last week, in SEC v. Scoville, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. v. MEMORANDUM OF LAW & ORDER Civil File No (MJD/JSM)
Perrill et al v. Equifax Information Services, LLC Doc. 47 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA DAVID A. PERRILL and GREGORY PERRILL, Plaintiffs, v. MEMORANDUM OF LAW & ORDER Civil File No.
More informationNo In The Supreme Court of the United States. JACKIE HOSANG LAWSON AND JONATHAN M. ZANG, Petitioners, v. FMR LLC, et al., Respondents.
No. 12-3 In The Supreme Court of the United States -------------------------- --------------------------- JACKIE HOSANG LAWSON AND JONATHAN M. ZANG, Petitioners, v. FMR LLC, et al., Respondents. --------------------------
More informationMEMORANDUM QUESTION PRESENTED. Analyze the merits of potential age discrimination claims under Maryland and
MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Hiring Attorney Lisa Solomon DATE May 23, 2005 RE: L v. S USA QUESTION PRESENTED Analyze the merits of potential age discrimination claims under Maryland and federal law in light of
More informationGibney v. Evolution Marketing Research, LLC
NEW YORK LAW SCHOOL LAW REVIEW VOLUME 61 2016/17 VOLUME 61 2016/17 JUSTIN OFFERMANN Gibney v. Evolution Marketing Research, LLC 61 N.Y.L. Sch. L. Rev. 529 (2016 2017) ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Justin Offermann
More informationArticle. By Richard Painter, Douglas Dunham, and Ellen Quackenbos
Article [Ed. Note: The following is taken from the introduction of the upcoming article to be published in volume 20:1 of the Minnesota Journal of International Law] When Courts and Congress Don t Say
More information- 1 - BEFORE THE NATIONAL BUSINESS CONDUCT COMMITTEE NASD REGULATION, INC. DECISION. District No. 9
- 1 - BEFORE THE NATIONAL BUSINESS CONDUCT COMMITTEE NASD REGULATION, INC. In the Matter of District Business Conduct Committee For District No. 9 Complainant, v. DECISION Complaint No. C9A960002 District
More informationCase 8:17-cv VMC-JSS Document 32 Filed 12/15/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID 259 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
Case 8:17-cv-02023-VMC-JSS Document 32 Filed 12/15/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID 259 ROY W. BRUCE and ALICE BRUCE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION Plaintiffs v. Case No.
More informationDEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BUREAU OF INDUSTRY AND SECURITY
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 12/14/2012 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2012-29789, and on FDsys.gov DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BUREAU OF INDUSTRY
More informationNo In the SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 12-3 In the SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES --------------------------------------------------- JACKIE HOSANG LAWSON and JONATHAN M. ZANG Petitioners, v. FMR LLC, et al. Respondents. ---------------------------------------------------
More informationCase 1:15-cr RGA Document 652 Filed 02/12/18 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 9254
Case 1:15-cr-00023-RGA Document 652 Filed 02/12/18 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 9254 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Plaintiff, DAVID R. GIBSON, ROBERT
More informationUnited States Small Business Administration Office of Hearings and Appeals
Cite as: Size Appeal of Global Dynamics, LLC, SBA No. SIZ-5979 (2018) United States Small Business Administration Office of Hearings and Appeals SIZE APPEAL OF: Global Dynamics, LLC, Appellant, SBA No.
More informationUNITED STATES OF AMERICA Before the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Before the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 Release No. 9565 / March 27, 2014 SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 Release No. 71823 / March 27, 2014 ACCOUNTING
More informationIn the United States Court of Federal Claims
In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 04-1513T (Filed: February 28, 2006) JONATHAN PALAHNUK and KIMBERLY PALAHNUK, v. Plaintiffs, THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. I.R.C. 83; Treas. Reg. 1.83-3(a)(2);
More information