I have long advocated for a federal statutory definition of insider trading because I believe that the current approach has been for the courts to convict first and then explicate the theory supporting the conviction in a later appellate opinion. As...
The introductory paragraph in Ojjeh v. Brown, 2019 Cal. App. LEXIS 1304, suggests that the case may involve allegations of securities fraud:
From time to time the question arises about whether a limited liability company, corporation or some other form of entity might serve as a director. This is, in fact, a question that I tackled four years ago in this post. The short answer is that...
Last week, I wrote about a recent Court of Appeal decision allowing for the possibility that a sale of shares at a sheriff's sale could amount to conversion. Duke v. Superior Court, 2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 1116. A fundamental principle underlying the...
An entire division of California's Business & Professions Code is devoted to a single plant genus - Cannabis. The official name of the division is the "Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act" aka the MAUCRSA. Bus. & Prof. Code §...
Last month, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued this public statement warning about touting of securities by celebrities:
Establishing personal jurisdiction may seem mundane, but without it a plaintiff may soon find itself out of court, as did the plaintiff in Marshall v. Galvanoni, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185530.
As I have mentioned on numerous occasions, California has its own insider trading statute - California Corporations Code Section 25402. The statute is included in the California Corporate Securities Law of 1968. In general, the jurisdiction of...