Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) "Yates Memo" in 2015 renewed the federal government's commitment to hold individuals accountable for corporate wrongdoing and offered related incentives. Companies, looking to minimize their enforcement risks and avoid indictment, are incentivized to provide the government information about employees and executives, sometimes to support a claim that a rogue employee acted against company policy. These incentives apparently have been successful; individual prosecutions for corporate malfeasance have increased in recent years. See, "The Yates Memo is Here to Stay: Signs of Increasing Efforts to Hold Individuals Criminally Liable for Corporate Wrongdoing," Business Crimes Bulletin (June 2019).
However, criminal liability remains a concern for all companies and organizations, and prosecuting corporate wrongdoers continues to be a "high priority" for the DOJ. See, Justice Manual §9-28.010. Consistent with its Principles of Federal Prosecution of Business Organizations, DOJ focuses criminal prosecutions on those corporate actions that endanger consumers, public health and safety, the environment and free markets. Id. Many of these violations can also give rise to civil regulatory enforcement, and companies must be mindful of the risk that a compliance failure could cross the line from civil to criminal (and possibly result in parallel civil and criminal enforcement). This happened to two companies in the food industry — Chipotle Mexican Grill and Blue Bell Creameries LP — who recently resolved criminal probes (through a deferred prosecution agreement and guilty plea, respectively) related to food safety failures that sickened customers.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.