Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
How to Make the SEC Disgorge Exculpatory Evidence
In the post-Enron world, the SEC is ratcheting-up the stakes in many of its cases. With millions of dollars in increased funding and hundreds of additional staff, it is bringing more cases, seeking harsher penalties, and generally litigating more aggressively. If recent press releases are indicative, it is also increasingly coordinating its civil enforcement activities with criminal investigations by the Department of Justice. As one SEC district administrator stated in a recent newspaper interview: “People are looking for heads. And we're going after them.”
The SEC's ever growing prosecutorial assertiveness means that defense counsel in SEC civil actions need to compel the SEC — by negotiation or court motion — to produce impeachment evidence, ie, evidence that directly proves innocence (Brady material) and proof that undermines the evidence supporting the SEC's theory of the case (Giglio material – see Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972)). Federal prosecutors are required to produce impeachment evidence during a criminal case, but the SEC does not readily produce it in a civil action, even though it is asking courts to impose crippling fines, order disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and impose lifetime employment bans based upon allegations of fraud. Moreover, SEC civil proceedings often set up a criminal case, with its deposition transcripts becoming the roadmap for conviction. Thus, the same due process that compels disclosure of exculpatory evidence in criminal cases should apply in proceedings initiated by the SEC.
Requesting Exculpatory Information
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?