| Private Treble Damage Actions Under Federal Antitrust Law |
|
| Under federal antitrust law, persons and companies harmed by anticompetitive conduct may seek an award of triple their damages, an injunction, and costs of the action (including attorney fees) against a party that violates federal antitrust laws. For example, price fixing or an agreement among competitors on the price they will charge is considered a per se illegal violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1, that the government may prosecute as a felony. As a further deterrent to such activity, those harmed by the violation may seek treble damages and an injunction. More... |
|
|
| The Intrastate Offering Exemption from SEC Registration Requirements |
|
| Securities may be sold without first being registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission if one of several exemptions applies. An exemption does not allow the use of any false or misleading statements in the offer or sale of the securities, and the offering may still be subject to requirements under state laws. However, if an exemption is applicable, then the expense and burden of the initial registration and periodic reporting of substantial information about the company may be avoided. More... |
|
|
| Insider Trading |
|
| (Bounties for Persons Reporting Insider Trading) More... |
|
|
| General Partnership Basics |
|
| Partnerships are a traditional form for doing business. General partnerships are made up of two or more persons or entities, each of which takes part in and is responsible for the management of the partnership. Other partnerships and companies may be partners in a general partnership. More... |
|
|
| Corporate Criminal Liability |
|
| Corporations were not initially held criminally responsible for corporate activities. A corporation was considered to be a legally fictitious entity, incapable of forming the mens rea necessary to commit a criminal act. The Supreme Court ultimately rejected this notion in 1909 in New York Central & Hudson River Railroad v. U.S. A railroad company employee paid rebates to shippers in violation of federal law. The court upheld the corporation's criminal conviction, finding no reason that corporations could not be held "responsible for and charged with the knowledge and purposes of their agents, acting within the authority conferred upon them." The Supreme Court concluded that criminal liability could be imputed to the corporation based on the benefit it received as a result of the criminal acts of its agents. The case and its progeny have essentially imported the doctrine of respondeat superior from tort law into the corporate criminal realm. A corporation may be convicted for its agent's unlawful acts when the agent acted within the scope of his or her actual or apparent authority. Another theory of corporate criminal liability is the "collective knowledge doctrine." As knowledge of criminal activity is often the scienter element of a particular crime, the requisite knowledge can be imputed to the corporation based on the collective knowledge of the directors and officers. More... |
|
|