翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ Credit River (Minnesota) ・ Credit River Township, Scott County, Minnesota ・ Credit Saison ・ Credit Savvy ・ Credit score ・ Credit score in the United States ・ Credit scorecards ・ Credit Sesame ・ Credit Solutions of America ・ Credit spread ・ Credit spread (options) ・ Credit Suisse ・ Credit Suisse First Boston ・ Credit Suisse First Boston (Europe) Ltd v Lister ・ Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v. Billing ・ Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v. Simmonds ・ Credit Suisse Securities Japan Limited “Mass Understatement of Income Tax” Case ・ Credit Support Annex ・ Credit tenant lease ・ Credit theory of money ・ Credit to the Nation ・ Credit transfer ・ Credit union ・ Credit Union 1 ・ Credit Union 1 (Alaska) ・ Credit Union 1 (Illinois) ・ Credit Union Central of Canada ・ Credit Union Central of Manitoba ・ Credit Union Classic ・ Credit Union Deposit Guarantee Corporation Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v. Simmonds ： ウィキペディア英語版 Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v. Simmonds ''Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v. Simmonds'', , is a United States Supreme Court decision regarding the limitation period for insider trading claims. The court ruled in an 8-0 unanimous opinion that the limitation period was subject to traditional equitable tolling. Chief Justice John Roberts recused himself from the case. == Background == In 2007, Vanessa Simmonds, a recent college graduate, simultaneously filed lawsuits against fifty five financial institutions accusing them of abuses during the internet firm IPOs from 1999-2001 that eventually led to the dot com bust. Amongst her lawyers was her father David Simmonds who had earlier successfully argued a similar case against an internet start-up. The plaintiffs argued that the financial institutions violated section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by not disclosing so-called "short-swing" profits, that is profits from trades occurring ove a period of less than six months. A federal district court consolidated the nearly identical cases and granted a motion to dismiss, stating that the two year limitation on the period on Section 16(b) had expired. On appeal, the Appeals court for the 9th circuit reversed the decision, stating that the two year period was tolled until the "insider" or party benefitting from the profit had disclosed the transaction. The Supreme Court, in a majority opinion written by Justice Scalia remanded and vacated the lower court's decision, ruling that the limitations period for Section 16(b) was subject to traditional equitable tolling.〔 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v. Simmonds」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.