United States v. Martoma
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
894 F.3d 64 (2017)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Mathew Martoma (defendant) was an investment manager. Dr. Sidney Gilman worked on clinical trials for a new drug. Gilman had a fiduciary duty to keep the results of the trials confidential. Martoma consulted with Gilman about Alzheimer’s disease, generally, to gain a knowledge of the subject matter surrounding the drug trials. Martoma paid Gilman for each consultation. During the consultations, Gilman provided Martoma with inside, confidential information about the trial results. Martoma traded on this information. The federal government charged Martoma with insider trading. The district court instructed the jury that it could find that Gilman personally benefited from his tip if Gilman tipped Martoma (1) with the intent to benefit himself, (2) with the intent to benefit Martoma, or (3) as a gift to develop a friendship with Martoma. The jury convicted Martoma. In 2017, the Second Circuit published an opinion affirming the conviction (Martoma I). In 2018, the Second Circuit amended that opinion (Martoma II).
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Katzmann, C.J.)
Dissent (Pooler, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 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.
