In SEC v.Ginsburg,Ginsburg was CEO of a company that merged with another company,and he told his relatives that the merger might occur.Knowing that the stock price might then rise,the relatives bought stock in the company and profited.Ginsburg was prosecuted by the SEC for insider trading.The appeals court held that:
A) Ginsburg was guilty and would pay a $1 million fine
B) Ginsburg had misappropriated company information by passing information on to his relatives,but that was not insider trading,so he could not be convicted
C) Ginsburg may have used poor judgment but his relatives have no obligation to the company,so there is no legal issue here
D) Ginsburg had violated his fiduciary obligation and can be sued for any losses that the company suffers as a result,but has not violated the rule against insider trading
E) none of the other choices
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q363: Insider trading is:
A) the buying or selling
Q368: The rationale behind prohibiting insider trading is
Q369: Studies indicated that the enactment of the
Q370: Someone who does not have a fiduciary
Q371: The buying or selling of stock by
Q372: You are on the subway in New
Q375: Insider trading is:
A) legal if no profit
Q376: The CEO of Big Ships knows his
Q377: Chiarella worked at a company that printed
Q379: Insider trading is:
A) legal if no profit
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents