Tenth Circuit gives broad interpretation to whistleblower protections of Sarbanes-Oxley Act

Last week, in Lockheed Martin Corporation v. Administrative Review Board, DOL (June 4, 2013), the Tenth Circuit, in an opinion by Judge Michael Murphy, dealt a blow to business interests who had been arguing for a narrow interpretation of the whistleblower protections in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

The case has garnered widespread attention, and here is round-up of links to stories about it:

“Sox And Whistleblowers — Any Fraud Will Do” by Catherine Foti at Forbes.

“Tenth Circuit Gives Another Win to Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblowers” at the Whistleblower Law Blog.

“Tenth Circuit Upholds Broad Definition of Sarbanes-Oxley Protected Activity” by Jason M. Knott at the Suits by Suits blog (which is one of the best names for a blog we’ve come across in a long time).

“Lockheed Martin Did Not Protect Its Whistleblower, Says 10th Cir.” by Betty Wang at the FindLaw 10th Circuit News and Information Blog.

“Tenth Circuit Issues its First Decision Interpreting SOX: Offers Broad Reading of the Act” at Orrick’s Employment Law and Litigation Blog.

“Former Lockheed employee wins third round in whistleblower case” by Ned Hunter at the Colorado Springs Gazette.

The National Chamber Litigation Center’s page about the case is here.


This entry was posted in News, Opinions and Analysis, Tenth Circuit and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.