Search Results for: Erhart

Update on Bofl SOX Whistleblower Litigation

This is an update on our previous blog posts regarding the Erhart v. BofI Holding, Inc. case. We previously reported in October 2017 and March 2017 on a whistleblower litigation brought by Charles Erhart, a former Bank of Internet Holding, Inc. (Bofl) internal auditor.  In late 2018, the parties filed cross-motions for judgement on the … Continue Reading

Update on BofI Whistleblower Litigation

We previously reported in March and last October on a whistleblower litigation brought by Charles Erhart, a former Bank of Internet Holding, Inc. (BofI) internal auditor.  On December 3, 2015, in a separate action, the shareholders of BofI brought a derivative suit, based in part on the facts of the whistleblower case, claiming BofI’s board of directors … Continue Reading

UPDATE: California Federal Court Permits Former Bank Internal Auditor’s Whistleblower Claims to Proceed

A California federal court—in Erhart v. BofI Holding, Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14755, Case No. 15-cv-02287 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 11, 2017)—recently denied BofI Federal Bank’s (“BofI’s”) motion to dismiss the Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower claims plead in their former internal auditor Charles Erhart’s amended complaint. The court also denied BofI’s motion as to Erhart’s defamation claim, … Continue Reading

California District Court Addresses Whistleblower’s Self-Help

In Erhart v. BofI Holding, Inc., Case No. 15-cv-02287, (S.D. Cal. Feb. 14, 2017), a bank’s internal auditor reported alleged misconduct to federal agencies, engaged in self-help discovery by appropriating the bank’s confidential information, and allegedly widely disseminated such information. When the bank alleged that this conduct violated the parties’ confidentiality agreement and state and … Continue Reading

Whistleblower’s Attorney’s Communications with Regulators Found to be Protected by Work Product Doctrine

A California Magistrate Judge in BofI Federal Bank v. Erhart ruled that a whistleblower’s attorney’s communications sent to federal regulators were protected by the attorney work product doctrine.  No. 15-cv-2353 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 5, 2016).  The court concluded that the whistleblower’s attorney had not waived work product protection through her disclosure to third-party regulators, finding that she … Continue Reading

LexBlog

This website uses third party cookies, over which we have no control. To deactivate the use of third party advertising cookies, you should alter the settings in your browser.

OK