Birkelbach v. Securities & Exchange Commission

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting the argument that SEC’s claim accrued on the first day of President’s failure to supervise employee’s activity
• raising but not addressing the possibility that the continuing violations doctrine may “permit the SEC to consider untimely violative conduct so long as there was some timely violative conduct and the conduct as a whole can be considered as a single course of conduct”
• “[T]here is no meaningful distinction between the entities [FINRA and NASD]. . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).