Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Federal prosecutors have rightly demanded that corporations invest time and money in compliance programs to combat corporate crime. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has enforced this imperative with a big stick: If an employee breaks the law while engaged in the company's business, the company's lack of an “effective compliance program” is a ground for imposing the “corporate death penalty,” as in the case of Arthur Andersen, or a range of lesser (but still severe) penalties.
But what about compliance in the business of dispensing justice? The uptick in implosions of high-profile criminal cases has been cause for concern among the DOJ's most ardent supporters. Policymakers need to ask whether the DOJ is doing as much to mitigate its own risks of employee misconduct as it requires of the companies it investigates and prosecutes.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.