Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
U.S. Supreme Court Settles Whether Illegality Claims Go to Arbitrator
Until the recent decision in Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, 126 S.Ct. 1204 (Feb. 21, 2006), there was some uncertainty as to how claims of illegality would fare against attempts to enforce arbitration agreements. The decision did not turn on whether the contract was void or voidable, as did earlier lower court decisions, but simply on whether the illegality claim was directed to the underlying contract or the arbitration clause itself. Relying on Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co., 388 U.S. 395 (1967), the Court treated the illegality claim in the same manner as a claim of fraud in the inducement and held that 'unless the challenge is to the arbitration clause itself, the issue of the contract's validity is considered by the arbitrator in the first instance.' 126 S.Ct. at 1206.
Buckeye was brought as a class action in the Florida state court, claiming that a check-cashing firm charged usurious interest. The allegedly usurious contract contained a standard arbitration clause and provided it would be governed by the Federal Arbitration Act ('FAA'). On a motion to compel arbitration by the check-cashing firm, the trial court ruled that since the contract was void ab initio (because it was illegal), the arbitration clause could not be enforced. The intermediate appellate court went the other way, holding that since the arbitration clause itself was not challenged as illegal, it could be enforced. The Florida Supreme Court reversed on the basis that to enforce an arbitration clause in an illegal agreement would 'breathe life into a contract that not only violates state law, but also is criminal in nature.' Id. at 1207.
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.