On Dec. 10, 2014, the Second Circuit decided United States v. Newman, 773 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2014), cert. denied, 136 S.Ct. 242 (2015). The court held that in order to prove that a “tipper” of insider information received in exchange for the tip a personal benefit sufficient to create liability, the government must offer “proof of a meaningfully close personal relationship that generates an exchange that is objective, consequential, and represents at least a potential gain of a pecuniary or similarly valuable nature.” Id. at 452.
Before Newman, federal prosecutors routinely took advantage of the seemingly more forgiving Dirks v. SEC, 463 U.S. 646, 664 (1983), benefit test. Courts deemed the test satisfied where a tip was in exchange for “maintaining a useful networking contact,” United States v. Whitman, 904 F. Supp. 2d 363, 372 (S.D.N.Y. 2012), or where the tip was “a gift of information to a friend.” SEC v. Obus, 693 F.3d 276, 291 (2d Cir. 2012). Since Newman, no court has upheld an insider trading conviction based on such fuzzy reputational or networking benefits, such as the “career advice” the tipper received in Newman.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
