United States v. Martoma Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained скачать в хорошем качестве

United States v. Martoma Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... United States v. Martoma | 894 F.3d 64 (2018) Generally, a person who trades based on tips of confidential information given by a corporate insider in breach of their fiduciary duties can be liable for insider trading if the person knew, or should’ve known, of the breach. In determining whether an insider breached a fiduciary duty, courts consider whether the insider will personally benefit from the breach. In United States versus Newman, the Second Circuit held that a personal benefit will only be found if there’s a meaningful close personal relationship between the insider and tippee. Four years later, the Second Circuit reexamined this relationship requirement in United States versus Martoma. Mathew Martoma was a hedge fund portfolio manager at S. A. C. Capital Advisors. In his position, Martoma managed numerous investments in pharmaceutical and healthcare companies. In two thousand eight, two pharmaceutical companies, Elan Corporation and Wyeth, were jointly conducting a clinical trial on a drug designed to treat Alzheimer’s disease. To obtain information about the drug, Martoma paid for consultations with doctors. One of doctors was Sidney Gilman, chair of the safety monitoring committee for the clinical trial on the drug. Another doctor was Joel Ross, a principal investigator in the clinical trial. Both Gilman and Ross had an obligation to keep the results of the clinical trial confidential. However, Gilman and Ross provided Martoma with material, nonpublic information, including updates on the drug’s safety and patients’ responses. In July of two thousand eight, Elan and Wyeth issued a press release regarding the results of the trial, which caused Elan’s share price to increase. Later that month, Gilman presented the results at a conference, which caused Elan’s share price to decline. But prior to Gilman’s presentation, Martoma made trades in Elan and Wyeth, resulting in large gains and avoiding large losses. Subsequently, the United States government charged Martoma in federal district court with conspiracy to commit securities fraud and securities fraud. Following trial, the court instructed the jury that it could find that Gilman and Ross received a personal benefit if it found that they provided the information with the goal of maintaining or developing a friendship or networking contact. The jury then returned a guilty verdict. Martoma appealed to the Second Circuit. Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/united-... The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/united-... Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_... Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Facebook ►   / quimbeedotcom   Twitter ►   / quimbeedotcom   #casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries