Lawyer who tipped SEC can't claim whistleblower award, US appeals court rules
By Mike Scarcella
Aug 16 (Reuters) -A corporate attorney who tipped off the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to possible fraud involving his company was properly denied eligibility to collect a whistleblower award, an appeals court said in a ruling unsealed on Friday.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said the attorney, who was not named, failed to meet SEC requirements for whistleblower information to be "original" and not derived from legal representation of a client.
There is a limited exception to the requirements under which lawyers could claim an SEC award if their disclosure was made in accordance with state professional attorney conduct rules and in a client's interest. The D.C. Circuit found the exception did not apply.
The three-judge panel upheld a commission order denying a cut of the unspecified award.
In a statement, attorneys for the unnamed lawyer said their client “did the right thing in blowing the whistle” and said he “put a stop to a massive securities fraud.”
The SEC declined to comment.
Much of the litigation was conducted under seal, shielding the names of the attorney and his company.
The D.C. Circuit said the underlying tip was related to a 2018 enforcement action in Florida against two individuals, the lawyer’s company and other entities. Sanctions levied by the SEC in the case totaled tens of millions of dollars.
Whistleblower awards for attorneys are available only in limited circumstances, the SEC told the appeals court.
The lawyer argued that he acted in his company's interest and provided information to the SEC to prevent it from committing a crime.
The D.C. Circuit disagreed.
“In reporting on the suspected wrongdoing, then, Doe was reporting on his own client,” the court said. “Common sense therefore dictates that Doe could not have reasonably believed that he was acting in his client’s best interest.”
The SEC’s whistleblower program as of last year had doled out nearly $2 billion in awards to about 400 whistleblowers since its creation in 2010, according to the agency.
The largest awards have been worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
The case is John Doe v. Securities and Exchange Commission, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, No. 23-1044.
For Doe: Tom Cummins and Max Maccoby of Washington Global Law Group
For SEC: William Shirey of SEC
Read more:
Comcast sues US Labor Department to shut down whistleblower case, citing US Supreme Court
US Justice Dept. launches whistleblower program aimed at corporate crime
Why foreign workers are not shielded by federal whistleblower laws
Wall Street criminal enforcer urges whistleblowers to come forward
Reporting by Mike Scarcella
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
