Close X
Attorney Spotlight

What colorful method does Claire Miley use to keep up with the latest healthcare regulations as they relate to proposed transactions? Find out more>

Search

Close X

Experience

Search our Experience

Experience Spotlight

On December 1, 2016, Parker Hannifin Corporation and CLARCOR Inc. announced that the companies have entered into a definitive agreement under which Parker will acquire CLARCOR for approximately $4.3 billion in cash, including the assumption of net debt. The transaction has been unanimously approved by the board of directors of each company. Upon closing of the transaction, expected to be completed by or during the first quarter of Parker’s fiscal year 2018, CLARCOR will be combined with Parker’s Filtration Group to form a leading and diverse global filtration business. Bass, Berry & Sims has served CLARCOR as primary corporate and securities counsel for 10 years and served as lead counsel on this transaction. Read more here.

CLARCOR
Close X

Thought Leadership

Enter your search terms in the relevant box(es) below to search for specific Thought Leadership.
To see a recent listing of Thought Leadership, click the blue Search button below.

Thought Leadership Spotlight

Securities Law Exchange BlogSecurities Law Exchange blog offers insight on the latest legal and regulatory developments affecting publicly traded companies. It focuses on a wide variety of topics including regulation and reporting updates, public company advisory topics, IPO readiness and exchange updates including IPO announcements, M&A trends and deal news.

Read More >

Fifth Circuit Rules Dodd-Frank's Anti-Retaliation Provision Is Only Available For Whistleblowers Who Report To The SEC

Publications

July 19, 2013

As we have noted in previous alerts dated July 22, 2010, November 11, 2010 and November 30, 2011, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act ("Dodd-Frank") provides a number of incentives and protections to those who report wrongdoing – i.e., "whistleblowers." One of the key protections is Dodd-Frank’s anti-retaliation provision, which provides a private right of action against employers who retaliate against the whistleblower for reporting. This provision protects whistleblowers from retaliatory discharge, demotion, suspension, threats, harassment, or any other manner of discrimination.

The Fifth Circuit ruled Wednesday, however, that the Dodd-Frank anti-retaliation provision only protects whistleblowers who disclose alleged wrongdoing to the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), and not those who report internally. In Asadi v. GE Energy USA LLC, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 14470 (5th Cir. 2013), an executive sued GE under Dodd-Frank after he was allegedly fired for internally reporting a possible securities law violation to his supervisor and the GE ombudsman for the region. The Court affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the executive’s claims, holding that the plain language of the provision creates a private cause of action only for individuals who provide information to the SEC.

Other district courts have considered this question and have concluded that the whistleblower-protection provision, as enacted, is either conflicting or ambiguous because a separate Dodd-Frank anti-retaliation category does not specifically require disclosure to the SEC. These courts have adopted a more expansive view of Dodd-Frank whistleblower protections and concluded that the provision extends to protect certain individuals who do not make disclosures to the SEC. See, e.g., Kramer v. Trans–Lux Corp., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136939, at *4-5 (D. Conn. 2012); Nollner v. S. Baptist Convention, Inc., 852 F. Supp. 2d 986, 994 n.9 (M.D. Tenn. 2012); Egan v. TradingScreen, Inc., No. 10 Civ. 8202 (LBS), 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47713, at *4–5 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). The Fifth Circuit’s ruling on this issue – the first by an appellate court – has created a potential circuit split, and the issue may ultimately have to be decided by the Supreme Court.


Related Professionals

Related Services

Notice

Visiting, or interacting with, this website does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Although we are always interested in hearing from visitors to our website, we cannot accept representation on a new matter from either existing clients or new clients until we know that we do not have a conflict of interest that would prevent us from doing so. Therefore, please do not send us any information about any new matter that may involve a potential legal representation until we have confirmed that a conflict of interest does not exist and we have expressly agreed in writing to the representation. Until there is such an agreement, we will not be deemed to have given you any advice, any information you send may not be deemed privileged and confidential, and we may be able to represent adverse parties.