Got a tip for us? Share it...

Apple's Disclosures Regarding Jobs' Health Remain Under Scrutiny by SEC

Bloomberg reports that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is continuing to investigate Apple's disclosures regarding Steve Jobs' health during the early January period leading up to the announcement that Jobs would be taking a six-month medical leave of absence. The report is a follow-up to Bloomberg's January report about the investigation.

"The issue here is: Did Apple or Jobs make misleading disclosures, tested by what they knew at the time?" said Robert Hillman, a securities law professor at the University of California, Davis. "A disclosure could be misleading if it's a partial truth."

Whether the SEC will ultimately be able to take action against Apple or Jobs is unknown, given the uncertainty about the situation and the "murky" laws regarding disclosure of the health of companies' CEOs. Regardless of the extent to which a company has a duty to reveal health matters, it is clear that once a company chooses to speak about an issue, it must do so truthfully.

While there has to be some measure of confidentiality around the health of executives, any disclosures need to be accurate and complete, said Jahan Raissi, a former SEC enforcement attorney.

"Once you open your mouth and start to speak on a topic, you have to say something completely truthful," said Raissi, who is now a partner at Shartsis Friese LLP in San Francisco. "If what you omitted is material, thats a problem."

On that basis, the SEC is focusing its inquiry on what events may have transpired between January 5th, when Jobs and Apple announced that he was suffering from a "hormone imbalance" for which the treatment was "relatively simple" and January 14th, when Jobs announced that he was taking a leave of absence due to the medical issue being "more complex" than originally thought.

Jobs' health issues ultimately required him to undergo a liver transplant, although he was still able to meet his stated timeline in returning to work by the end of June.

Top Rated Comments

(View all)

34 months ago
It's important to keep the investor communicated what happens health wise to its executives. However, due to the nature of fame (unluckily shall we say?) of the CEO, the issue of privacy arise.

Apple really has to find a middle on what information to release.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
34 months ago
Last I saw from apple, they said steve was on track to return in late June.

Well look at that, it happened. Hypothetical "he could have died if he was getting a transplant!" shouldn't matter seeing as they held true to their word. After going on medical leave I don't see a reason why anyone should be privy to his information. He came back when they said and is now heading the company as usual.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
34 months ago
Poor Steve
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
34 months ago
Clearly the FEC has no bigger fish to fry than to spend time on a nine-day period of time some months ago, right? Right? Freakin' bureaucratic kleptomaniacs.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
34 months ago
I'm all for investigating to find OUT if something illegal was done, rather than just assuming either way. Apple should be held responsible if they've broken the law.

But some of the hollering seems to boil down to the premise that a patient's condition doesn't change over time, and that doctors don't do new tests or discover new information over time either.

But the fact is, doctors CAN determine something new--something they did not know a week (or an hour) before.

So if Apple makes one statement one week and an entirely new statement the following week, that's no more impossible than the DOCTOR making a new statement. Which happens all the time. The condition changes, or new test results come in, or whatever.

How much of those private records can be legally seized? I guess we'll find out.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
34 months ago
Apple should disclosure Jobs' Health from the beginning, now they are in hot waters with the government.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
34 months ago
I like how people care more about money than others personal privacy. THINK OF THE SHAREHOLDERS! :rolleyes:
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
34 months ago
Hi
I still don't see the big deal, even for investors to know details of medical "issues". You're going to bail from any investments in the company if suddenly Steve comes down with cancer... Oh wait... :rolleyes: It's fine if a company should divulge when a CEO 'steps out' for any kind of medical reason during a period but why really shouldn't be a big deal. Would you enjoy telling a ton of people about all of your medical issues? Apple's survived in Steve's absence before and they'll do it in the future.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
34 months ago
Dang.. I don't think he's going to be back. At least not like he was before, full time.
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives
34 months ago
I thought i had a cold which turned out to be hay fever sorry to those I said I had a cold
:rolleyes:
Rating: 0 Positives / 0 Negatives

[ Read All Comments ]