× Didn't find what you were looking for? Ask a question
Top Posters
Since Sunday
s
5
g
5
K
5
o
5
g
5
o
4
k
4
s
4
I
4
k
4
j
4
o
4
Home Q & A Board Humanities Legal Studies
New Topic  
EdJones95 EdJones95
wrote...
Go to Answer
Posts: 336
Rep: 0 0
6 years ago
In SEC v. Ginsburg, Ginsburg was CEO of a company that merged with another company, and he told his relatives that the merger might occur. Knowing that the stock price might then rise, the relatives bought stock in the company and profited. Ginsburg was prosecuted by the SEC for insider trading. The appeals court held that:
 a. there was not enough evidence to reasonably permit the inference that Ginsburg conveyed nonpublic information to his family members
  b. there was enough evidence to reasonably permit the inference that Ginsburg conveyed nonpublic information to his family members, so he was liable for securities fraud
  c. Ginsburg did not have a fiduciary obligation to the company, so could not be guilty of insider trading
  d. Ginsburg had a fiduciary obligation to the company, but his conduct could not be proven to have violated it e. Ginsburg did not use the information himself so there was no fraud
Read 31 times
1 Reply
Replies
Answer verified by a subject expert
cdbaker97cdbaker97
wrote...
#1
Posts: 203
Rep: 0 0
6 years ago
Sign in or Sign up in seconds to unlock everything for free
1

Related Topics

EdJones95 Author
wrote...

6 years ago
Just got PERFECT on my quiz
jbag1237
wrote...

Yesterday
You make an excellent tutor!
bkrandy
wrote...

2 hours ago
Thanks for your help!!
New Topic      
Quick Reply
Explore
Post your homework questions and get free online help from our incredible volunteers
  798 People Browsing
Start New Topic Take the Tour CoursesNew Study Tools Topics Trending Browse by Textbook
Live Chat
Related Images
  
 202
  
 198
  
 186
Your Opinion
Which is the best fuel for late night cramming?
Votes: 146
Previous poll results: Who's your favorite biologist?