31 U.S.C. § 5328

Repealed. Pub. L. 116–283, div. F, title LXIII, § 6314(b), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 4603]

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 31 CasesGoogle Scholar

[repealed]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2007–2021 · leading case: Taft v. Agric. Bank of China Ltd., 156 F. Supp. 3d 407 (S.D.N.Y. 2016).
Taft v. Agric. Bank of China Ltd., 156 F. Supp. 3d 407 (S.D.N.Y. 2016). · cites it 10× “¶¶ 33-42; (2) whistle-blower discrimination under the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”), 31 U.S.C. § 5328 , see id. ¶¶ 43-49 ; and (3) whistleblower discrimination under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (“FIRREA”), 12 U.”
Kell v. Iberville Bank, 352 F. Supp. 3d 650 (E.D. La. 2018). · cites it 4× “§ 1831j(a) and 31 U.S.C. § 5328 . Plaintiff also claimed Defendant was liable under Louisiana Civil Code article 2315 for outrageous and harassing conduct that caused her undue humiliation, embarrassment, and anxiety.”
Hill v. Mr. Money Fin. Co., 309 F. App'x 950 (6th Cir. 2009). · cites it 4× “§ 1831j, and second, under 31 U.S.C. § 5328 (collectively, “Federal Whistleblower Statutes”); third, unlawful discrimination and retaliation in violation of the clear public policy of Ohio; and fourth, prohibited discriminatory and retaliatory conduct in violation of Ohio Rev.”
Schroeder v. Greater New Orleans Fed. Credit Union, 664 F.3d 1016 (5th Cir. 2011). “§ 1831 ; 31 U.S.C. § 5328 ; and 18 U.S.C. § 1513 (e), which the district court dismissed.”
Hill v. Mr. Money Fin. Co., 491 F. Supp. 2d 725 (N.D. Ohio 2007). · cites it 3× “31 U.S.C. § 5328 (a). No insured depository institution may discharge or otherwise discriminate against any employee with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because the employee (or any person acting pursuant to the request of the employee)…”
Barrick v. Pngi Charles Town Gaming, LLC, 365 F. Supp. 3d 672 (2019). · cites it 4× “may discharge or otherwise discriminate against any employee with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because the employee (or any person acting pursuant to the request of the employee) provided information to the Secretary of the Treasury,…”
Barrick v. PNGI Charles Town Gaming, LLC (N.D.W. Va. 2019). · cites it 3× “may discharge or otherwise discriminate against any employee with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because the employee (or any person acting pursuant to the request of the employee) provided information to the Secretary of the Treasury,…”
Shaikh v. Nat'l Bank of Pakistan (S.D.N.Y. 2020). · cites it 2× “The section provides: No financial institution or nonfinancial trade or business may discharge or otherwise discriminate against any employee with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because the employee (or any person acting pursuant to the…”
Michael Barrick v. PNGI Charles Town Gaming (4th Cir. 2020). “PER CURIAM: Michael Barrick appeals the district court’s order granting the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissing his civil action alleging wrongful termination and retaliation, in violation of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), 31 U.S.C. § 5328 (a) (2018), and the…”
Shaikh v. Nat'l Bank of Pakistan (2d Cir. 2021). “] 18 19 31 U.S.C. § 5328 (a). To prevail on a whistleblower claim under Section 5328(a), 20 Shaikh was required to show that (1) he was an employee of a financial 21 institution; (2) he provided information regarding a possible violation of 22 specified laws and regulations by…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.