Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On Dec. 12, 2006, U.S. Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty revised the controversial 'Thompson Memorandum' (officially entitled 'Principles of Federal Prosecution of Business Organizations,' Department of Justice (DOJ), Jan. 2003). A new 'McNulty Memorandum' was issued after harsh criticism from District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan in the KPMG case and a proposal by Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) to abrogate the Thompson Memorandum by act of Congress.
In the February 2007 issue, Business Crimes Bulletin Editorial Board Member Robert W. Tarun will assess the impact on corporations under federal investigation. Are they now free to withhold privileged documents and advance legal fees to targeted employees? Does the McNulty Memo signal a kinder, gentler DOJ? Look for the answers in next month's issue.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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.
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.
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.
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.