Chiarella v. United States
United States Supreme Court
445 U.S. 222 (1980)
- Written by Rocco Sainato, JD
Facts
Chiarella (defendant) was an employee for a printing company that handled documents concerning corporate takeovers. The companies to be acquired were redacted until the final draft of the takeover agreements. In one instance, Chiarella was able to discover the companies involved in a takeover bid through the information provided in the draft takeover agreement. He then traded on this information, which was not public, and enjoyed earnings of $30,000. When it was discovered he was trading on nonpublic information, the United States (plaintiff) brought charges against him for violation of § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, prohibiting fraud in the purchase or sale of securities, based on Chiarella's nondisclosure of information. At trial, Chiarella testified that the information he used in the stock trading was confidential, and that he obtained the information by deciphering the documents that the companies had provided to his employer. The trial court instructed the jury, among other things, that the jury must decide whether Chiarella used material nonpublic information to which he knew other people in the securities-trading market did not have access. A jury convicted Chiarella of insider trading, and the court of appeals affirmed Chiarella’s conviction. The United States Supreme Court granted Chiarella's petition for certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Powell, J.)
Concurrence (Brennan, J.)
Concurrence (Stevens, J.)
Dissent (Blackmun, J.)
Dissent (Burger, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 788,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
