Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A Primer for Cross-Examining Mental Health Professionals
The involvement of mental health professionals in the adjudication of custody disputes is a relatively new phenomenon. Three decades ago, there were fewer than a dozen books written by and for mental health practitioners, offering information concerning evaluation methods and related matters. The vast majority of mental health professionals who are currently offering their services as evaluators received their graduate school training in health-related topics. As mental health professionals in increasing numbers began expressing an interest in performing custody evaluations, programs designed to provide re-training opportunities were developed by organizations such as the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts and the American Academy of Forensic Psychology. Many practitioners took advantage of re-training opportunities and developed expertise in this emerging area. Some practitioners elected to obtain ersatz credentials from organizations that had been established by creative entrepreneurs for the purpose of selling credentials. Unfortunately, there are now so many that listing them all would be impractical.
In medicine, psychology, and social work, the traditional certifying boards granting “diplomate” status (board certification) in recognition of proficiency in a specialty all emerged from and were supported by the parent organizations of the professions (American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, and National Association of Social Workers). In each case, there was a desire among members of the parent organization to develop a procedure by which members with a demonstrably advanced level of knowledge, training, and experience in a specific specialty could submit themselves to a peer-conducted review of evidence of their mastery and obtain formal recognition of their proficiency upon successful completion of the process (Golding, 1999).
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
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 DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
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.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
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.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.