Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Part One of this article examines key actions brought by U.S. regulators against compliance officers in 2017 based on their failures to ensure that their firms maintain effective compliance and AML programs.
In May 2014, Andrew Ceresney, then-Director of Enforcement of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), in his keynote address at Compliance Week 2014, stated, “ …. legal and compliance officers who perform their responsibilities diligently, in good faith, and in compliance with the law are our partners and need not fear enforcement action.” Andrew Ceresney, Director of Division of Enforcement, SEC, Keynote Address at Compliance Week 2014 (May 20, 2014). In the same speech, however, Ceresney articulated the circumstances under which the SEC would bring actions against compliance officers, personally: “[W]hen the [SEC] believes … compliance personnel have affirmatively participated in the misconduct, when they have helped mislead regulators, or when they have clear responsibility to implement compliance programs or policies and wholly failed to carry out that responsibility.” Id.
By Jonathan B. New and Victoria L. Stork
In May 2018, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a new policy to address a growing problem in white-collar criminal and civil enforcement. With increased…
By Robert J. Anello and Justin Roller
Part One of a Two-Part Article
What was once perceived as a straightforward limitation on the government’s significant enforcement powers has become obscured by statutes and court interpretations that tend to elongate the period for the government to act in ways that often are not transparent to even experienced criminal practitioners.
By Robert J. Stearn, Jr., Cory D. Kandestin and Christopher M. De Lillo
Delaware Bankruptcy Court Protects Communications with Financial Professionals Originating in Delaware
Because state law applies at the time a transaction is negotiated, the parties might assume — reasonably so — that state privilege law will govern communications with their attorneys and financial professionals. But what happens if, years later, a suit is filed in federal court and brings claims under federal law? Does state privilege law still apply?
By Sue Reisinger
Here’s a sure way to lose half your cooperation credit in a federal investigation: Let your in-house counsel advise employees not to cooperate with U.S. prosecutors.