Section 16(b): Judicial Inconsistency in Application of the Pragmatic Approach

Simple item page
dc.creatorAcker, Charles Rodney
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-13T16:50:42Z
dc.date.available2018-11-13T16:50:42Z
dc.date.issued1974
dc.description.abstractExamines the scope and application of section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Initially introduced to rectify abuse by corporate insiders, section 16 has becomes the focus of controversy because of the inconsistency of application and interpretation of section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act. The author concludes that the inconsistency of recent court decisions has created confusion in the application of section 16(b) to merger situations. As a result, the author suggests courts should clarify what approach will be taken to these cases to provide the attorney with some degree of predictability. If an equitable approach cannot be found, the SEC should reconsider the exemption of these transactions.en_US
dc.identifier.citation5 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 731en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2346/82167
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherTexas Tech Law Reviewen_US
dc.subjectSecurities Exchange Act of 1934en_US
dc.subjectSection 16en_US
dc.subjectInsider abuseen_US
dc.subjectInitial holdings registrationen_US
dc.subjectMergersen_US
dc.titleSection 16(b): Judicial Inconsistency in Application of the Pragmatic Approachen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
46_5TexTechLRev731(1973-1974).pdf
Size:
955.56 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.57 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Texas Tech Law Review