Law360 recently indicated in its lead story the broad implications of the recent ruling in Kramer v. Trans-Lux for financial whistleblowers. The Kramer decision marked the first time a Dodd-Frank whistleblower’s retaliation claim has survived a motion to dismiss when, earlier this week, a federal judge embraced an expansive definition of whistleblower under Dodd-Frank.
The Kramer decision joins three other court decisions that have focused on the anti-retaliation provisions of Dodd-Frank as the latest in a series of decisions that broadly interpret who qualifies as a whistleblower. According to Law360’s report, many whistleblower advocates believe that the Kramer decision will result in an uptick in the filing of whistleblower claims against employers.
These developments are favorable for financial whistleblowers who face retaliation from their employers for reporting fraud or illegal conduct because by filing a retaliation claim under Dodd-Frank rather than the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, plaintiffs have a longer statute of limitations and may bring their claims directly in federal court without having first to proceed through an administrative process at the Department of Labor.
In sum, the Kramer decision will serve as additional authority for employees who seek to bring Dodd-Frank complaints after having suffered retaliation when reporting violations to their employers internally, as well as to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
The article, “Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Ruling May Spark Retaliation Suits” appeared in the September 27, 2012 edition of Law360.