Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Parallel Proceedings: The End of an Error?
Three years ago, two similarly minded district court decisions rocked federal regulatory agencies and the Department of Justice (DOJ) by rejecting longstanding assumptions about the proper conduct of simultaneous civil and criminal investigations, commonly known as 'parallel proceedings.' First, in United States v. Scrushy, 366 F. Supp.2d 1134, 1139 (N.D. Ala. 2005), the court said: 'To be parallel, by definition, the separate investigations should be like side-by-side train tracks that never intersect.' Accordingly, the court dismissed perjury charges arising out of the defendant's testimony in an SEC civil deposition because ' prior to the deposition ' SEC investigators had exchanged information with federal prosecutors, provided them expert assistance, and complied with certain of their requests.
Next, in United States v. Stringer, 408 F. Supp.2d 1083, 1087-88 (D. Or. 2006), another district court dismissed the entire indictment against three defendants in a corporate-fraud case because it found that factually and temporally overlapping investigations conducted by the SEC and the U.S. Attorney's Office in Oregon 'were not parallel proceedings.' The court reasoned that the prosecutors were 'actively involved in the SEC investigation' by meeting regularly with SEC personnel, receiving documents, requesting that depositions be taken in the district to establish venue for possible false statements charges, and advising the SEC investigators on the elements of criminal false statements charges. In the alternative, the Stringer court found that the indictment should be dismissed because the government had 'engaged in deceit and trickery to keep the criminal investigation concealed' when an SEC attorney instructed a court reporter not to mention the DOJ's involvement to defense attorneys and also side-stepped a direct response when one defense attorney asked whether there was a pending criminal investigation.
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
New York's Latest Cybersecurity Commitment
On Aug. 9, 2023, Gov. Kathy Hochul introduced New York's inaugural comprehensive cybersecurity strategy. In sum, the plan aims to update government networks, bolster county-level digital defenses, and regulate critical infrastructure.
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.
How AI Has Affected PR
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.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
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.