In United States v.O’Hagan the U.S.Supreme Court concluded that a lawyer working at a law firm representing a company intending a takeover of the Pillsbury Company had:
a.) not violated the insider trading laws because he hadn’t misappropriated any information since he didn’t actually do any legal work for Pillsbury
b.) not violated the insider trading laws because he hadn’t been either a tipper or a tippee
c.) violated the insider trading laws because he engaged in a short-swing profit
d.) violated the insider trading laws, based on misappropriation, even though he didn’t do any legal work for the company intending to purchase Pillsbury