Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Methodology of an Auditing Firm

By Kevin Adler
August 13, 2004

Judy Brompster of Accountability Services (New York) says that some auditing firms are too prescriptive in their approach. “How can an auditing firm say that a deposition should take 40 minutes?” she asks. “Some take more, and some take less.”

Accountability Services lets the attorneys be the legal experts, but it focuses on making sure that they follow through on their commitment. “We expect legal counsel to do what it says it is going to do,” Brompster said. “Thus, if you tell your client that the deposition took an hour, we want to see evidence that it was an honest hour.”

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

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.

The Bankruptcy Hotline Image

Recent cases of importance to your practice.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

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.

How AI Has Affected PR Image

When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

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.