United States v. O'Hagan

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

United States v. O'Hagan
Holding
A person who trades in securities for personal profit, using confidential information misappropriated in breach of a fiduciary duty to the source of the information, may be held liable for violating § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5, and so the SEC did not exceed its authority under § 14(e) by adopting Rule 14e-3(a) without requiring a showing that such trading entailed a breach of fiduciary duty.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
David Souter · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
MajorityGinsburg, joined by Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Breyer; Scalia (parts I, III, IV)
Concur/dissentScalia
Concur/dissentThomas, joined by Rehnquist
Laws applied
Rule 10b-5

United States v. O'Hagan, 521 U.S. 642 (1997), was a

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Court held that an individual may be found liable for violating Rule 10(b)-5 by misappropriating confidential information.[1] The Court also held that the Securities and Exchange Commission did not exceed its rulemaking authority when it adopted Rule 14e-3(a), "which proscribes trading on undisclosed information in the tender offer setting, even in the absence of a duty to disclose".[2]

Background

James O'Hagan was a partner at

Pillsbury Company, headquartered in Minneapolis.[2] Even though he was not directly involved in the transaction, O'Hagan learned about the possible takeover by overhearing a discussion at lunch. In August 1988, O'Hagan began purchasing stock and options of the Pillsbury company, at around $39 per share.[3]

By the end of September, O'Hagan owned approximately 5,000 shares of Pillsbury and 2,500 options – more than any other individual investor.[3] In October, Grand Met announced the takeover bid and the price of Pillsbury stock rose to $60 per share. O'Hagan subsequently sold his stock at a profit of more than $4.3 million.[4]

Opinion of the Court

The Court held that O'Hagan could be found liable under Rule 10(b) for misappropriating confidential information, and the court

See also

References

  1. ^ United States v. O'Hagan, 521 U.S. 642, 647 (1997).
  2. ^ a b O'Hagan, 521 U.S. at 647.
  3. ^ a b O'Hagan, 521 U.S. at 647-48.
  4. ^ O'Hagan, 521 U.S. at 648.
  5. ^ O'Hagan, 521 U.S. at 660-65, 666-67.
  6. ^ Lowry J. Reisberg, Petett's Company Law: Company Law & Corporate Finance 510 (Pearson, 4th ed. 2012).

External links