|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Report Link Ninth Circuit Permits In-House Counsel to Proceed with SOX Whistleblower Claims.Ford & Harrison LLP - October 29, 2009 The Ninth Circuit recently issued its first decision addressing the substantive requirements necessary to establish a claim under the whistleblower protection provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX). See Van Asdale v. International Game Technology (9th Cir. August 13, 2009). In overturning the trial court's grant of summary judgment to the employer, the Ninth Circuit relied on the text of the statute and the Department of Labor's (DOL) regulations interpreting the statute. Report Link Ninth Circuit Reinstates Sarbanes-Oxley Lawsuit Brought by In-House Corporate Lawyers.Jackson Lewis LLP - September 14, 2009 Two former in-house corporate attorneys were entitled to a trial of their claims brought under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“SOX”) that they were fired because of complaints about fraud against the company’s shareholders, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (in San Francisco) has held. In deciding its first case under the whistleblower provision of SOX, Van Asdale v. International Game Tech., et al., the Ninth Circuit reversed summary judgment in favor of the defendants and held that the plaintiffs had raised a genuine issue of material fact as to whether they wrongfully were discharged. The Ninth Circuit has jurisdiction over Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington. Report Link Anti-Retaliation Law: Sarbox Whistleblowers.Barker Olmsted & Barnier - September 04, 2009 The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, sometimes called Sarbox or SOX, is a federal law enacted in 2002, as a reaction to a number of major corporate and accounting scandals including Enron and WorldCom. Sarbox set new or enhanced standards for public company boards, management and their public accounting firms. It does not apply to privately held companies. The act contains a number of provisions ranging from additional corporate board responsibilities to criminal penalties, and requires the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to implement rulings on requirements to comply with the new law. Report Link SARBANES-OXLEY’S WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION EXPLAINED.Shaw Valenza LLP - August 27, 2009 Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”) is a federal law. Congress passed it on July 30, 2002, in response to a number of major corporate and accounting scandals. SOX, among other things, created whistleblower protection for any employee who reports that a publicly-traded company subject to SEC regulations has engaged in any of a number of fraudulent activities.
Although introduced with great fanfare, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals just recently issued its first opinion analyzing the substantive requirements necessary to establish a claim under the Act’s whistleblower-protection provisions. In Van Arsdale v. International Game Technology, decided on August 13, 2009, the Court held whistleblowers must show only that they called attention to what they believed was fraud to sue their employers for wrongful termination under SOX.
Report Link Sarbanes-Oxley’s 90-Day Statute of Limitations Not Triggered By Conditional Firing.Ogletree Deakins - May 20, 2009 An employee alleging a violation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) must file a complaint within 90 days from the date of that alleged violation. That 90-day period begins to run from the date on which the complainant knows or reasonably should know that the complained-of act has occurred. In whistleblower cases under SOX, the 90-day statute of limitations runs from the date on which the employee receives “final, definitive, and unequivocal notice” of an adverse employment decision. As defined in SOX, the term “unequivocal” means that the notice is not ambiguous, and is free from misleading possibilities. Report Link Sarbanes-Oxley Determination Precludes Later Discrimination Lawsuit Involving Same Facts.Jackson Lewis LLP - May 05, 2009 In a case of first impression, a federal appeals court in Philadelphia has issued a decision that demonstrates the significance of claims brought under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX). An employee may be precluded by statute from filing claims of discrimination pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act against her former employer, where those claims are based on the same facts that supported her earlier, unsuccessful administrative SOX claim, the Third Circuit has ruled in an unpublished opinion. Report Link Department of Labor Decision May Expand SOX Whistleblower Protection.Jackson Lewis LLP - March 26, 2009 A recent decision of the U.S. Department of Labor may expand whistleblower liability under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“Sarbanes-Oxley” or “SOX”) to private entities engaged in business with publicly-traded companies. Sarbanes-Oxley applies to companies listed on publicly-traded stock exchanges and, in section 806, protects employees who report certain wrongdoing to their superiors from retaliation. Report Link First Circuit Court Sets Standard for Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Claims.Jackson Lewis LLP - February 19, 2009 In a decision of first impression in the Circuit, but resembling those of other courts, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has found a plaintiff’s allegations of shareholder fraud were not “objectively reasonable” under the whistleblower protection provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“SOX” or “Act”), and so has affirmed summary judgment for the employer. Report Link Billing Irregularities Not Enough for SOX Civil Whistleblower Protection, Fourth Circuit Rules.Jackson Lewis LLP - December 16, 2008 An employee who was fired after reporting alleged billing irregularities is not protected by the whistleblower provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has ruled. The law’s civil whistleblower provisions protect employees who “definitively and specifically alleg[e] mail or wire fraud” that they “reasonably believe” violates federal law prohibiting fraud against shareholders. Allegations of billing discrepancies, without more, do not meet this standard, the Court said. Platone v. Dep’t of Labor, No. 07-1635 (4th Cir. Dec. 3, 2008). The Fourth Circuit has jurisdiction over Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia. Report Link Awful New Whistleblower Law Affects Huge Swath of Employers.Fisher & Phillips, LLP - October 02, 2008 With almost no fanfare, Congress has stomped and gouged employers – again. It has passed a new law that will affect a significant proportion of the American economy and create new "rights" (translation: opportunities to sue) for employees. Called the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (Safety Improvement Act), the law provides broad protections to employees of manufacturers, private labelers, distributors, and retailers, who make complaints relating to consumer product safety. Report Link Fourth Circuit Affirms Limitation on Whistleblower Status Under Sarbanes-Oxley Act.Jackson Lewis LLP - September 26, 2008 Refusing to accept that any failure to comply with Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (“GAAP”) constitutes a per se violation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 whistleblower provision, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has dismissed the case of David Welch, former Chief Financial Officer of Cardinal Bankshares, against his former employer. Welch v. Chao, No. 07-1684 (4th Cir. Aug. 5, 2008). The whistleblower provision protects those who report activity they “reasonably believe” violates a provision of the law related to fraud against shareholders. The Court found that Welch’s complaints did not constitute “protected activity” under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”). Report Link SOX Applied to Employee Working Overseas.Jackson Lewis LLP - May 01, 2008 As the contingent of globally-mobile employees increases, the issue of whether American law, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, applies to American employees while working overseas is receiving greater attention by the courts. Report Link Fifth Circuit Provides Guidance on Whistleblower Claims Under Sarbanes-Oxley Act.Phelps Dunbar LLP - February 05, 2008 When most people think of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, they think of a law regulating corporate governance, accounting, and financial disclosure. But public and private companies should remember that Sarbanes-Oxley is also an important employment statute. Report Link The Critical Role Of HR In Sarbanes-Oxley Compliance.Fisher & Phillips, LLP - September 05, 2007 Human Resources managers should never underestimate the importance of their role in Sarbanes-Oxley compliance. Too often, publicly-traded companies focus their Sarbanes-Oxley compliance efforts on financial reporting only, i.e., as a function of the Accounting and Legal departments. But the full participation of Human Resources can be critical in the corporation's efforts to comply with SOX. Report Link DOL's Administrative Review Board Decision Limits Whistleblower Status Under Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.Jackson Lewis LLP - August 20, 2007 The case of David Welch, former Chief Financial Officer of Cardinal Bankshares (and perhaps the most well-known whistleblower under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act), has taken another turn as it wends its way through the U.S. Department of Labor and court system. According to a recent ruling from the DOL's Administrative Review Board ("ARB"), allegations of accounting irregularities, in the absence of claims of fraud or violations of the securities laws, are not enough to confer whistleblower status on Welch under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Report Link DOL Clarifies Protected Activity in Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Cases.Ford & Harrison LLP - October 06, 2006 In an important decision helping to define the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) whistleblower provisions, the Department of Labor's Administrative Review Board (ARB) has reversed the decision of an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), finding that an airline employee did not engage in protected activity under SOX when she complained to her employer about what the ARB described as how the “company spends its money” or its “ability to collect a debt.” See Platone v. FLYi, ARB Case. No. 04-153. The ARB’s decision provides some much needed guidance regarding what constitutes protected activity under SOX. Report Link Stage of SOX Whistleblower Proceedings May Affect Preliminary Reinstatement as Remedy.Jackson Lewis LLP - September 13, 2006 Reinstatement is one of the most significant remedies provided for by the civil whistleblower provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Two decisions in 2006 have helped to define whether a successful complainant in a SOX whistleblower action can enforce a preliminary order of reinstatement by the Department of Labor. Report Link Toward The End of the French Exception?: Overcoming the Challenges of Establishing a Global "Whistleblower" Hotline.Littler Mendelson, P.C. - December 09, 2005 Publicly-traded companies covered by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act ("SOX") – the U.S. corporate-governance law enacted in the wake of scandals such as Enron Corp. - are required to make available to employees an anonymous whistleblower reporting system (commonly called a hotline). Report Link Administrative Judge Dismisses Sarbanes-Oxley Complaint of Employee Previously Reinstated Under Preliminary DOL Order.Jackson Lewis LLP - November 28, 2005 The Sarbanes-Oxley Act delegates enforcement authority to the Department of Labor through the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Since the enactment of SOX, employers have been concerned about the broad remedial powers of OSHA to address alleged violations of the Act's whistleblower protection provision. Among others, OSHA has the power to order reinstatement of an alleged whistleblower prior to a full hearing on the merits of a case. Report Link Vice President's Reinstatement in Limbo after Law Judge Dismisses Underlying SOX Charges.Jackson Lewis LLP - November 08, 2005 Since the enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX), employers have been concerned about the broad remedial powers of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration for addressing alleged SOX violations. The SOX legislation delegated enforcing authority under the Act to the Department of Labor through OSHA, which has included OSHA's power to order reinstatement of an alleged whistleblower prior to a full hearing on the merits of a case. Report Link Court Strikes Whistleblower's Claims for Punitive Damages and Jury Trial Under Sarbanes-Oxley Act.Jackson Lewis LLP - August 23, 2005 Adding to the small but growing body of federal court decisions interpreting the whistleblower protection provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX Act) is a recent Texas case. The decision from the U. S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas is significant in that it favorably addresses questions of bottom line impact for employers: the plaintiff's right to a jury trial, and the scope of available "special damages," i.e., damages for reputational injury, exemplary and punitive damages. Report Link Court Enforces DOL Order of Reinstatement of Former Employees Under Sarbanes-Oxley.Jackson Lewis LLP - June 10, 2005 A recent federal court decision under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act ordering the reinstatement of a former employee illustrates the broad remedial powers that the Act has granted to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Report Link Sarbanes-Oxley: lessons for private employers.Jones Walker - December 15, 2004 Imagine that you work for a private, family-run business — your family’s business. Let’s picture you as the bookkeeper and your husband (fond of red suits and ever reluctant to trim his long white beard) as the master toy craftsman and sole delivery person. With a few good hands, all of whom are very small (you provide reasonable accommodations so they can do their jobs) and like to wear funny hats and shoes (nothing obscene or violating your grooming policy — hard to complain since you allow the beard), your business is by all measures successful. Report Link Former Bank CFO Makes Case That Discharge Violated Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Provision.Jackson Lewis LLP - February 11, 2004 In reportedly the first successful whistleblower claim under the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act, or Sarbanes-Oxley Act, an administrative law judge has ruled that a former bank chief financial officer was unlawfully terminated after protesting suspected insider trading and other financial practices. Report Link OSHA Issues Revised Whistleblower Investigation Manual Detailing Procedures for Complaints Under Sarbanes-Oxley and Thirteen Other Federal Statutes.Jackson Lewis LLP - September 18, 2003 The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has issued a revised Whistleblower Investigation Manual to provide guidance to agency staff about handling discrimination complaints under various federal statutes, including Title VIII of the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act of 2002, known as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Report Link DOL Adopts Interim Final Rule Implementing Whistleblower Protection Provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley Act [PDF File, p10].Jones Walker - July 24, 2003 The proposed regulations are to be effective on the first day of the first plan year that begins on or after January 1, 2004. However, plan sponsors should make changes now to include the new tax credit information and cease using the 1986 model notice (if they have not already done so). Report Link Administrative Law Judge Decides Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Provision Should Not Be Applied Retroactively.Jackson Lewis LLP - March 03, 2003 A U. S. Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge has issued what appears to be the first decision under the employee protection provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Report Link Corporate Wrongdoing Legislation Gives Employees Whistleblower Protection Against Discrimination and Harassment. Jackson Lewis LLP - September 17, 2002 The corporate fraud scandals of recent months have prompted federal legislation to give added rights to employees who blow the whistle on corporate wrongdoing at publicly traded companies. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, signed by President Bush on July 30, protects employees who disclose information or participate in an investigation or proceeding related to alleged violations of securities laws, SEC rules, and federal laws pertaining to shareholder fraud.
|
ArticlesFound: 28 ArticlesNO SUBTOPICSEmployment Law Seminars
2010 Ushers In Many Important Changes to Workplace Laws
Columbia
November 20, 2009 Fisher & PhillipsANNUAL EMPLOYMENT LAW UPDATESacramento
December 1, 2009 Shaw ValenzaMonthly Webinar: Preventing Workplace Harassment (California and National)Webinar
December 1, 2009 LittlerCalifornia Legally Required Sexual Harassment Training: It's Never Too Late to ComplySan Francisco
December 1, 2009 Fisher & PhillipsThe Constangy Management Training Center "Employment Law 201"Tampa
December 2, 2009 ConstangyCalifornia Legally Required Sexual Harassment Training: It's Never Too Late to ComplyOntario
December 2, 2009 Fisher & PhillipsAudio Conference: Employee Caregivers Dealing With DementiaAudio Conference
December 2, 2009 Young ConawayClients, Adversaries and Witnesses: The Ethics of Communication in a Fast-Paced Legal World Web CastWebinar
December 4, 2009 Ford & HarrisonTaking Executive Compensation Hostage; What To DoWebinar
December 8, 2009 Baker HostetlerPREVENTING HARASSMENT AND OTHER EEO ISSUES AT WORK: IT’S ALL ABOUT RESPECT (AB 1825 COMPLIANCE)Sacramento
December 9, 2009 Shaw Valenza |
|
| ||
|
Terms of Use
|
Privacy
|
Advertising
|
About
|
Contact
|
For Law Firms
|
Partners
Copyright © 2009 elinfonet.com, llc.
The use of this site, and the terms and conditions for our providing information, is governed by our Terms of Use, including the disclaimers contained therein. By using this site, you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Use and that you accept and will be bound by the terms thereof.
This site is designed for lawyers concentrating in employment law and human resource professionals who specialize in employee relations. As more fully set forth in the terms of use, the information provided on or through this site is for general information purposes; it is not a determination of your legal rights, nor your responsibilities under the law. None of the information contained on this site is, or should be construed as, legal advice. The information should not be relied upon for legal advice. We are not engaged in the practice of law and no attorney-client relationship is being created. Any information communicated to any lawyer via this site does not have the confidentiality protection of the attorney/client privilege. If you are seeking legal advice, find a qualified lawyer in your area. If you need help finding a lawyer, call your local, county or state bar association. All logos and trademarks on this site are property of their respective owners. | ||
Federal Article Feeds