Confirm favorite deletion?
Securities Regulation Keyed to Coffee
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Yun
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
David, Yun’s husband and president of a Scholastic Corporation (Scholastic) subsidiary, was informed prior to public release that Scholastic’s revenue were going to considerably lower than analysts’ projections. Yun was informed by David of this as part of their post-nuptial division of assets. David asked that Yun keep this information to herself and she agreed. Later, a co-worker and friend of Yun’s, Burch, overheard Yun speaking with her attorney regarding the expected price decline in Scholastic’s stock. As a result of what he heard Yun say, Burch was no longer comfortable trading Scholastic stock and apparently attained additional information from Yun at an awards banquet later on in the day. The following day, Burch traded in Scholastic stock, attaining a 1,300% return on his investment by procuring earnings in excess of$250,000. The SEC had begun an investigation within mere hours of Burch’s trades, and as a result of that investigation, filed suit against Yun and Burch for violating Rule 10b-5 and § 10(b) of the Exchange Act. After responding to special verdicts, the jury found both defendants guilty under a “misappropriation theory” of insider trading liability. Burch and Yun appealed, arguing that the district court was erroneous in educating the jury on the factors of misappropriation theory of liability for insider trading. The court of appeals granted review.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
- Policy: Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.
- Court Direction: Shares where the Court went from here for this case.