(Answered) : c. Upheld Chiarella’s conviction for Insider Tradi 1d. Ruled that Chiarella could not trade on non-pu duties to companies’ shareho

c. Upheld Chiarella’s conviction for Insider Tradi 1d. Ruled that Chiarella could not trade on non-pu duties to companies’ shareholders his about the company to without obtaining any advantage for 4. In case of Dirks v. SEC the Supreme Court held that: Dirks could not be liable for tipping non-public information clients because Secrist revealed the scandal to Dirk without himsel a. ys clients for b. Dirks violated Rule 10b-5 because he revealed the scandal to his compan c Dirks was liable for breach of fiduciary duty to the company’s shareholders d. Dirks job as securities analyst precluded him from