On June 25, 2018, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit revisited its August 2017 insider trading decision in United States v. Martoma, amending its earlier landmark opinion to avoid a panel conflict with the Second Circuit’s 2014 decision in United States v. Newman. In its amended opinion, the court again tackles an unanswered question left in Newman’s wake: What are the contours of a tipper’s required “personal benefit” in a gift-giving context? In Martoma II, the court walks back its personal-benefit definition and rejection of Newman, but, may achieve the same practical result as Martoma I. Martoma II is the latest in a string of critical insider trading decisions and may have significant ramifications for the government’s enforcement efforts.
Read the full article cowritten by litigation associate Grant R. MacQueen >>