Search Site
Menu
Courts Conducting the Whistleblowing

Whistleblowing is prevalent in the news. Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning captured our attention. As more claims emerge from workplaces, additional whistleblowing lawsuits are challenging the courts to define and interpret the many relevant laws.

Asadi v. GE Energy (USA)

Khaled Asadi raised concerns through GE Energy’s internal channels about the company engaging in bribery in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Almost immediately afterward, Asadi received a negative employment performance review and was encouraged to accept a demotion. He refused. One year after reporting the alleged bribery, Asadi was fired. He sued, claiming retaliation under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010’s whistleblower-protection provision. GE argued that Asadi was not a whistleblower under Dodd-Frank because he never reported a securities law violation to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This summer, the U.S. Court of Appeals agreed with GE.

Internal reporting requirement

Another question raised by recent litigation is whether a tipster must report internally and to the SEC. The final draft of the SEC whistleblower office’s rules is unclear. At one point, it says reports must be made to the SEC and in another that they may be made to other officials and departments. The U.S. Court of Appeals in the Asadi case held that a whistleblower must file a report with the SEC to be eligible for the law’s protections. Although internal reports are not mandated by the SEC’s rules, they are encouraged because the courts consider whether a tipster filed an internal report when determining the size of the bounty award.

Pursuing whistleblowers with the Espionage Act

For more than 25 years, the U.S. government has pursued various whistleblowers by claiming violations of the Espionage Act. In a recent decision in U.S. v. Stephen Kim, a district court ruled that prosecutors don’t need to prove that information revealed by a whistleblower is damaging to the United States or advantageous to a foreign government. Stephen Kim, a former State Department official was accused of disclosing intelligence about North Korea’s nuclear program to Fox News. Legal pundits fear that this decision could turn every government whistleblower into a spy in violation of the Espionage Act.

To blow or not to blow the whistle on government misconduct is a courageous decision. Consult with a Texas whistleblower attorney for information about reporting illegal actions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Honors
Our Office
  • Dallas Office
    4514 Cole Ave
    #600
    Dallas, Texas 75205
    Phone: 214-306-8045
    Fax: 469-729-9926
Testimonials
  • "Steve Kardell was terrific in representing me in some very adversarial discussions with Citigroup and also later represented me in my testimony before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission."  -Richard Bowen, Citigroup Whistleblower

  • "Incredible knowledge of employee related concerns and equally brilliant knowledge of health care regulations, standards of practice. I would recommend this firm to anyone."  -V.B.

  • "Reaching out to Steve Kardell was the best decision I made. His ability to provide immediate insight and direction was very powerful, and a huge relief during a very stressful time period. For anyone struggling with a whistleblower situation, I would highly recommend at least speaking with Steve. After a 10 minute call with him, I had a better understanding of what I was dealing with. Even better, he gave me some immediate hope. In the end Steve did a better job than I thought was possible. Steve was able to get in contact with people in my organization, that I didn’t have access to. Because of his years of experience, he already has contacts in many organizations in Dallas. The entire situation was handled peacefully. I was impressed by his ability to “keep the peace”–rather than creating a battle with the organization. The reason I didn’t reach out to a lawyer initially, was because I thought it would mean an immediate end to any hope of a positive relationship with the company. Steve was able to address my concerns, and in the end I was able to continue to work for them."  -KS

  • "Never thought my career would end like it did after 30 years of service. I was part of the first round of the so called reduction of force. I asked myself how can I be part of this with 30 years of seniority. How did they pick these 90 plus employees? Now, the culture of this organization made you question every decision they made. It wasn’t what you knew it’s was a culture of who you know. Nonetheless, I did not accept their severance package. I immediately starting looking for an attorney who would take on my case. After the initial call to Steve I had hope again. He was open and honest about everything and reassured me he would do his best for me, and he did. I had an awesome outcome. Thanks Steve you’re the best."  -S.S.

FOLLOW US
Facebook Twitter Linkedin RSS Feed JD Supra