The Supreme Court ruled on United States v. O'Hagan, a case on insider trading. In the case, O'Hagan, a lawyer in a firm representing the target of a tender offer, traded in the stock of the company using the insider information for personal profit. The Court ruled that this was a breach of a fiduciary duty to the source of the information, which is best characterized as:

In the case of United States v. O'Hagan, O'Hagan breached his fiduciary duty when he used insider information for personal gain, instead of in the best interest of his client.

Explanation:

In the case of United States v. O'Hagan, the Supreme Court ruled that O'Hagan, a lawyer who used insider information for personal gain, breached a fiduciary duty to the source of the information. A fiduciary duty is a legal obligation of one party to act in the best interest of another. The obligated party is typically a fiduciary, that is, someone entrusted with the care of money or property. The breach occurred because O'Hagan used the confidential information given to him in trust, not for the benefit of his client (the intended purpose), but for his own personal profit.

Learn more about fiduciary duty here:

https://brainly.com/question/31148084

#SPJ4