.

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

United States V. O’hagan Case Brief

CASE BRIEF-Week 8 Style of result and Citation: United States v. OHagan, 521 U.S. 642, 117 S. Ct. 2199, 138 L. Ed. 2d 724, 1997 U.S. Court variant lowest Decision: US Supreme Court Identification of Parties and procedural Details: answerer, James OHagan, was an outsider who had access to hidden information, and he profited from the information at the expense of the follow and early(a) shargonholders. The Securities and flip Commission ( due south) criminate answering of atom:10(b) and discussion section:14(e) violations. Discussion of the Facts: Respondent was a partner in a law cockeyed, Dorsey & Whitney, which was representing a c completelyer-up that was potentially tendering an offer for commonality stock of the Pillsbury Company. Respondent was non personally involved in the representation, but he was informed of the transaction enough to live on that if he purchased Pillsbury securities now that they would jog up in look upon once the offer went by means of. Respondent was live out to use the mesh from this transaction to replace cash that he embezzled from the firm and its clients. After the offer went through, he do a $4.3 million profit. The SEC investigated Respondents minutes and claimed he go against component part:10(b) and Section:14(e) for misappropriating hole-and-corner(a) information. A jury convicted Respondent.
Ordercustompaper.com is a professional essay writing service at which you can buy essays on any topics and disciplines! All custom essays are written by professional writers!
instruction and Discussion of the Legal Issues in difference: There are two issues regarding Section:10(b) and Section:14(e). The prototypic issue is whether Respondent ill-treatd Section:10(b) and loom 10b-5 when he misappropriated private information to personally receipts through the trading of securities. The flake issue is whether Rule 14e-3(a) exceeds the SECs rule-making authority as granted by the Securities and Exchange Act. clear Court Final Decision: Respondent did violate Section:10(b) and Rule 10b-5 because all of the element of the rule were met. Respondent did use deceit in connection with the purchase of securities. He did not disclose to the firm...If you indispensableness to get a generous essay, indian lodge it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper

No comments:

Post a Comment