David Hartley

009_PhotographyG_.jpg

David Hartley

$0.00

2019-2020 Senior Editor, 2018-19 Staff Editor, 2017-18 Contributor

David is currently a third-year law student at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law. He was born and raised in Denver, Colorado. In 2013, he moved to Texas to attend Southern Methodist University where he graduated with a Bachelor’s degree in Applied Physiology and Sports Management and a minor in Law and Legal Reasoning. During his time in Dallas, David worked for Harvard Investment Inc. before pursuing a career in sports. He has worked in Corporate Partnerships with the Dallas Stars, was an account executive for FC Dallas, and worked in sales for the Dallas Mavericks.

In addition to being a Staff Editor for The Race to The Bottom, David is a Managing Editor for the Sports & Entertainment Law Journal. He is currently interested in corporate, sports, and entertainment law.

Connect with David on LinkedIn.

Add To Cart
Student and Faculty Blog of University of Denver Sturm College of Law
No-Action Letter for Eli Lilly & Co. Permitted Exclusion of Proposal to Eliminate Supermajority Voting Requirements

In Eli Lilly & Co., 2018 BL 7440 (Jan. 8, 2018), Eli Lilly & Company (“Eli Lilly”) asked the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to permit the omission of a proposal submitted by William Steiner (“Shareholder”) requesting the board to replace the company’s supermajority voting requirement with a simple majority requirement. The SEC issued the requested no-action letter allowing for the exclusion of the proposal from the 2018 proxy materials under Rule 14a-8(i)(10).

SEC v. Sayid: District Court Denied Securities Lawyer's Motion to Dismiss SEC Fraud Allegations

In SEC v. Sayid, No. 17 Civ. 2630 (JFK), 2018 BL 9039 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 10, 2018), the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York denied securities lawyer Norman T. Reynolds’ (“Reynolds”) motion to dismiss a Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) complaint for failure to state a claim. The SEC alleged Reynolds wrote misleading opinion letters for Mustafa David Sayid (“Sayid”), the legal counsel for Nouveau Holdings Ltd. and Striper Energy, Inc. (collectively, the “Shells”), which opinion letters Sayid used to engage in market manipulation. The court found that the SEC adequately alleged facts that constitute strong circumstantial evidence of Reynolds’ conscious misbehavior.

Princeton Ophthalmic, LLC, v. Corinthian Ophthalmic, Inc.: Motions for Summary Judgment Denied Due to Conflicting Testimony of Material Facts

In Princeton Ophthalmic, LLC v. Corinthian Ophthalmic, Inc., No. 14-cv-05485 (PGS), 2017 BL 364534 (D.N.J. Oct. 10, 2017), the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey denied both Princeton Ophthalmic (“Plaintiff’s”) partial motion for summary judgment as to the first and third elements of section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Rule 10(b)(5) promulgated thereunder and Corinthian Ophthalmic, board members Drs. Ianchulev and Packer, and Corinthian CEO Mr. Ballou’s (“Defendant’s”) motion for summary judgment on Plaintiffs entire securities fraud complaint. The court denied the motions on the grounds there were genuine disputes of material facts concerning the Defendants’ misrepresentation of or lack of disclosure of the engineering capabilities of its ocular drug delivery device, the WHISPER.