Should Apple and its board be more forthcoming with details about the health of CEO Steve Jobs? It is a question that’s been tossed around the investor community for months now.  The company has been plagued by rumors about the failing state of Jobs’ health and has done little to address or alleviate concerns of the marketplace.

In January, Jobs, looking noticeably thinner, stated that he was simply suffering a hormone imbalance that would require him to take a six month leave of absence.  Since then, the Wall Street Journal has come to report he underwent a liver transplant at a hospital in Tennessee and is expected to return to work this month, as stated back earlier in the year.

Weigh In: Should Apple disclose more information about its CEO's health? Comment below

The issue of Jobs’ health brings up questions about the legal and corporate governance issues tied to sensitive issue of CEO health disclosures. Back in 2004, Jobs was treated for a rare type of pancreatic cancer called an islet-cell, or neuroendocrine, tumor and disclosed it after only he underwent treatment.

Bill George, a professor of Management Practice at Harvard Business School, says the law is vague about guidelines for CEO health disclosure though responsibility of the CEO is clear: CEOs are public figures and constituencies have the right to know about their health. George says that anything that potentially impairs leader’s ability to function should be disclosed. But the law stops short of defining the term impairment.

While legal experts say there is usually no responsibility on a company's part to disclose a CEO's health status, it is up to boards to decide how much to reveal to shareholders and the public. According to a recent Wall Street Journal article, at least some Apple directors were aware of the CEO's surgery with some of the company’s board members briefed on a weekly basis on the tech titan’s status. None of this information was shared with the investor community and was even potentially withheld from other company executives.

So what is the legal stance on CEO disclosure? According to George, if a shareholder poses that question, then Apple either needs to give an answer and if it turns out they didn’t provide accurate info, has basis for a suit. Activist shareholders could be the ones who raise hands to force an answer. Though Apple has been tightlipped through the whole process, it has released occasional statements to the public. The latest from Katie Cotton, an Apple spokeswoman, who told the Wall Street Journal over the weekend "Steve (Jobs) continues to look forward to returning at the end of June, and there's nothing further to say." As a result, according to George and other legal experts, investors have few avenues to pursue to push for information.

Apple did not immediately respond to requests for comment.