Skip to content
DWT logo
People Expertise Insights
About Locations Careers
Search
People
Expertise
Insights
About
Locations
Careers
Search
Publications
Securities Litigation

2nd Circuit Issues Must-Read Opinion Setting Out Standards for Insider Trading Liability

By  John A. Goldmark
October 2012
Share
Print this page

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, in SEC v. Obus, recently revived an insider trading enforcement action by the Securities and Exchange Commission against a hedge-fund manager and other individuals. In doing so, the 2nd Circuit, starting on page 15 of its opinion, set forth a succinct summary of the law on insider trading, which provides a useful source for understanding the basics of tipper and tippee liability under section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.

As the Obus court explains, insider trading claims rest on one of two basic theories. Under the classical theory, a corporate insider is prohibited from trading shares of that corporation based on material non-public information in violation of the duty of trust and confidence insiders owe to shareholders. A second theory, grounded in misappropriation, targets persons who are not corporate insiders but to whom material non-public information has been entrusted in confidence and who breach a fiduciary duty to the source of the information to gain personal profit in the securities market. A person who has a fiduciary duty of trust and confidence to shareholders (classical theory) or to a source of confidential information (misappropriation theory) and is in receipt of material non-public information has a duty to abstain from trading or to disclose the information publicly. The bar against insider trading is not confined only to insiders or misappropriators who trade for their own account; it also reaches situations where the insider or misappropriator tips another person who then trades on that information—i.e., tipper and tippee liability. Before liability may attach, however, the tipper or tippee must know or be reckless in not knowing that the information that is the subject of the tip is non-public and is material for securities trading purposes. 

Full October 2012 Quarterly Securities Enforcement Briefing

Related Articles

DWT logo
©1996-2022 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
NAVIGATE
Home People Expertise Insights
About Locations Careers Events Blogs
STAY CONNECTED

Subscribe to stay informed.

Subscribe
Employees
DWT Collaborate
EEO
Affiliations
Legal notices
Privacy policy
©1996-2022 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Close
Close

CAUTION - Before you proceed, please note: By clicking “accept” you agree that our review of the information contained in your e-mail and any attachments will not create an attorney-client relationship, and will not prevent any lawyer in our firm from representing a party in any matter where that information is relevant, even if you submitted the information in good faith to retain us.