United States: United States Supreme Court Poised To Address Standard For Insider Trading Following Second Circuit's Decision In United States v. Newman

​Today, the Solicitor General filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in United States v. Newman, 773 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2014), asking the United States Supreme Court to address the standard for insider trading in a tipper-tippee scenario.  Specifically, the Solicitor General argues that the Second Circuit's Newman decision is in conflict with the Supreme Court's 1983 decision in Dirks v. SEC, 463 U.S. 646 (1983), and the Ninth Circuit's recent decision in United States v. Salman,  No. 14-10204 (9th Cir. July 6, 2015).   Because the Supreme Court grants certiorari in nearly three out of four cases filed by the Solicitor General, the likelihood of a cert grant in Newman is particularly high. 

Companies, their employees, and investment advisors should monitor these developments closely because they have important implications for maintaining "best practices" in-house compliance programs, not to mention the impact of any Supreme Court decision in this area on the types of insider trading prosecutions and administrative proceedings that may be brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice.

At issue in Newman is what is commonly referred to as a tipper-tippee arrangement.  The classic scenario involves a corporate insider, referred to as the tipper, who has a fiduciary duty to his company but nonetheless agrees to provide material non-public information to an outsider, referred to as the tippee.  The tippee then trades on the basis of this information or provides the information to other downstream tippees (or both).  To secure a conviction for insider trading in this scenario under Dirks, the Government must demonstrate that the tippee knew the insider breached a duty by disclosing this information.  Key to the Dirks analysis was that the tippee in that case did not "breach a duty" because he did not reveal confidential information in exchange for personal benefit—he was trying to expose accounting fraud.  Of late, the DOJ and the SEC have aggressively pursued remote tippees based on increasingly vague articulations of what constitutes a "personal benefit."  

In Newman, the Second Circuit held the Government failed to adequately prove personal benefit.  The Government brought criminal charges against tippees who were three or four levels removed from the initial tippers—company employees who passed the information along to friends (in one case, a former classmate and co-worker and, in the other case, a church friend).  The trader-defendants (who received the information indirectly from the initial tippees) asserted they could not be convicted because the tippers did not receive any personal benefit and, even if the tippers had, there was no indication the defendants knew the tippers would receive such benefit.  As it did before the district court, the Government asserted under the Supreme Court's decision in Dirks that it need only demonstrate the tippees "traded on material, nonpublic information they knew insiders had disclosed in breach of a duty of confidentiality," not that the tippee did so for "personal benefit."  The Second Circuit rejected that contention, holding that the Government must establish both that (1) the insider disclosed confidential information in exchange for a personal benefit and (2) that the remote tippees were aware of this fact.  The Court in Newman went on to define "personal benefit," explaining that it includes family relationship, pecuniary gain or reputational benefits that will translate into future earnings, but not the mere fact of friendship between tipper and tippee absent "proof of a meaningfully close relationship that generates an exchange that is objective, consequential, and represents at least a potential gain of a pecuniary or similarly valuable nature." 

Earlier this month, the Ninth Circuit addressed a similar insider trading case, United States v. Salman.  There, the defendant, a remote tippee who knew the tipper provided the confidential information to his own brother, asserted that Newman precluded liability because there was no showing the tipper received a tangible personal benefit.  Interestingly, Judge Jed Rakoff—a judge on the Southern District of New York who was sitting by designation on the Ninth Circuit—authored an opinion distinguishing the relationship at issue in Salman from that in Newman, noting that it qualified as the sort of "meaningfully close relationship" identified by the Second Circuit.  He added, however, that "[t]o the extent" Newman could be construed as standing for the proposition that such a relationship, on its own, is not sufficient to create liability, the Ninth Circuit would decline to follow it.   

Against this backdrop, the Government has now filed a certiorari petition, calling the Second Circuit's ruling a "roadmap for unscrupulous traders."  The petition contends that the court's definition of "personal benefit" cannot be squared with the Supreme Court's decision in Dirks, which "did not require an 'exchange' to find liability for a gift of inside information and did not impose amorphous standards for the relationships that can support liability."  Specifically, the Solicitor General argues that Dirks allows for liability when either an exchange occurs irrespective of the nature of the relationship or a gift is given to a trading friend or relative even without any expectation of remuneration.  In addition, the Government asserts that the "meaningfully close" requirement identified by Newman finds no support in Dirks and should be rejected.     

The Government's petition is also notable for what it does not request:  it does not ask the Court to revisit the requirement that a tipper receive a personal benefit in order to breach a fiduciary duty and it does not take issue with the requirement that the tippee/trader know that the tipper received a benefit.  If the Court grants certiorari, it is possible, however, that it could adopt a position on personal gain different than the one advocated by the Government or articulated in Newman given that Dirks involved very different facts and did not delve as deeply into the issue and related policies as would be required if the Court hears Newman.  

We expect to learn sometime this fall whether the Supreme Court will accept the case.  If so, oral argument will likely be held early in 2016, with a decision issued by the following June.  At the same time these developments are occurring on the judicial front, there is movement in Congress.  In response to Newman, three bills were introduced in Congress that would prohibit anyone from trading on confidential information, regardless of whether he or she knows who the inside source is or whether the inside source received a personal benefit in exchange for disclosing the confidential information.  Of course, given the current polarization in Congress and the fact that it historically has, for the most part, declined to legislate in the insider trading arena, the prospect for passage of any law is uncertain. 

Orrick will continue to monitor the Newman case as well as the status of related legislation and report any developments that may shed light on the standard to be applied for insider trading going forward.  The firm frequently advises and is available to consult with investment and other financial firms on how to craft and maintain policies to address the use of material non-public information and respond to possible instances of impermissible trading.    

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
21 Nov 2018, Seminar, New York, United States

“Big data” is changing our economy. It has allowed Amazon, Google, Facebook and many others to redesign traditional business models and to create new or improved products and services with greater utility for consumers and often at very little cost.

24 Nov 2018, Speaking Engagement, New York, United States

Each year, the New York Region of IFA hosts a panel and reception at the NYU Law School. This year’s panel will include a discussion of the TCJA international provisions.

27 Nov 2018, Speaking Engagement, New York, United States

Employment Managing Associates, Alexandra Stathpoulos and Alexandra Heifetz are presenting at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law’s FORM+FUND Series.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions