| Business & Corporate Entities> Corporations> Shareholders & Other Constituents> Meetings & Voting |
|
| (Preparations for the Annual Shareholder Meeting) More... |
|
|
| Corporate Criminal Liability |
|
| Corporations were not initially held criminally responsible for corporate activities. A corporation was considered to be a legally fictitious entity, incapable of forming the mens rea necessary to commit a criminal act. The Supreme Court ultimately rejected this notion in 1909 in New York Central & Hudson River Railroad v. U.S. A railroad company employee paid rebates to shippers in violation of federal law. The court upheld the corporation's criminal conviction, finding no reason that corporations could not be held "responsible for and charged with the knowledge and purposes of their agents, acting within the authority conferred upon them." The Supreme Court concluded that criminal liability could be imputed to the corporation based on the benefit it received as a result of the criminal acts of its agents. The case and its progeny have essentially imported the doctrine of respondeat superior from tort law into the corporate criminal realm. A corporation may be convicted for its agent's unlawful acts when the agent acted within the scope of his or her actual or apparent authority. Another theory of corporate criminal liability is the "collective knowledge doctrine." As knowledge of criminal activity is often the scienter element of a particular crime, the requisite knowledge can be imputed to the corporation based on the collective knowledge of the directors and officers. More... |
|
|
| Limitations on Margin Trading |
|
| Limitations on Margin Trading More... |
|
|
| Reparations for Losses Resulting from Violations of Commodities Trading Laws |
|
| (Reparations for Losses Resulting from Violations of Commodities Trading Laws) More... |
|
|
| Injunctive Relief Under Federal Antitrust Laws |
|
| Injunctions may be sought to prevent a violation of federal antitrust laws from occurring or to halt an ongoing violation of the federal antitrust laws. Section 15 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 25, provides for injunctions sought by the government. The section gives U.S. District Courts jurisdiction to prevent and restrain violations of the Clayton Act and directs U.S. Attorneys, under the supervision of the Attorney General, to file actions seeking to prevent and restrain the violations. Section 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 26, authorizes "any person, firm, corporation, or association" to seek injunctive relief against threatened loss or damage by a violation of the antitrust laws. More... |
|
|