Friday, December 27, 2013

United States V. O’hagan Case Brief

CASE BRIEF-Week 8 Style of Case and Citation: coupled States v. OHagan, 521 U.S. 642, 117 S. Ct. 2199, 138 L. Ed. 2d 724, 1997 U.S. Court Rendering Final last: US Supreme Court Identification of Parties and Procedural expatiate: Respondent, James OHagan, was an come onsider who had access to confidential information, and he profited from the information at the expense of the follow and other shareholders. The Securities and transmute Commission (SEC) incriminate Respondent of atom:10(b) and component:14(e) violations. countersign of the Facts: Respondent was a partner in a virtue firm, Dorsey & Whitney, which was representing a company that was potentially tendering an offer for common job of the Pillsbury Company. Respondent was not personally involved in the representation, simply he was conscious of the transaction enough to know that if he purchased Pillsbury securities now that they would cast up in value erstwhile the offer went by means of. Res pondent was breathing out to design the profits from this transaction to replace money that he embezzled from the firm and its clients. After the offer went through with(predicate), he do a $4.3 million profit. The SEC investigated Respondents minutes and claimed he violated Section:10(b) and Section:14(e) for misappropriating confidential information. A jury convicted Respondent.
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.
Statement and Discussion of the Legal Issues in remainder: There are two issues regarding Section:10(b) and Section:14(e). The archetypical issue is whether Respondent violated Section:10(b) and Rule 10b-5 when he misappropriated nonpublic information to personally benefit through the trading of secur ities. The second issue is whether Rule 14e! -3(a) exceeds the SECs rule-making authority as granted by the Securities and Exchange Act. distinctly 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 want to get a full essay, Indian lodge it on our website: OrderEssay.net

If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: write my essay

No comments:

Post a Comment