Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
For companies suspected of wrongdoing, cooperating with Department of Justice (DOJ) investigations and self-disclosing their misconduct often appears to be their only option to avoid prosecution and reduce large financial penalties. But, these benefits often come at a price, especially to company employees who are caught in the middle. To gain cooperation credit for voluntary self-disclosure, companies are expected to identify all relevant facts relating to the individuals responsible for the alleged misconduct. And as part of demonstrating their cooperation to the government, companies often pressure their employees to submit to interviews, including with DOJ, or risk losing their jobs and/or indemnification of legal fees. Such scenarios, which have become prevalent in today’s corporate enforcement environment, place employees “between the rock and the whirlpool” by arguably coercing their testimony and infringing on their constitutional right against self-incrimination. See, Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493, 498 (1967).
*May exclude premium content
By Jodi Misher Peikin and Jacob Mermelstein
The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Liu v. Securities and Exchange Commission to address a question that, until fairly recently, seemed clear: whether the SEC has authority to obtain disgorgement in civil actions to enforce the federal securities laws.
By Robert J. Anello and Richard F. Albert
In recent years, practitioners have observed a tension between criminal enforcement of the broadly written terms of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 and the modern Supreme Court’s notions of statutory interpretation and due process in the criminal law context. A certiorari petition filed in late August in Sanchez et al. v. United States, asks the Supreme Court to address this tension, as embodied in the judge-made per se rule.
By Sareena Malik Sawhney
Over the past few years, defense attorneys have been turning to forensic accountants significantly more often in white-collar cases. An experienced and skilled forensic accountant is valuable to the defense team by casting reasonable doubt on the issue of intent and uncovering other evidence in support of innocence or a reduced sentence.
By Juliet Gunev
Maryland Jury Convicts Former Executive on FCPA Charges for Bribing Russian Official to Win Nuclear Fuel Transportation Contracts