Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
This past June, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit asked the New York Court of Appeals to provide guidance on questions of New York law related to the proceeds of a divorce settlement where such proceeds were funded by ill-gotten gains.
In deciding Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Walsh, 618 F3d 218 (2d Cir. 2010), the Second Circuit asked the Court of Appeals to enlighten them as to whether, under New York law, a wife could keep the money she received from her divorce settlement where a portion of the distributed assets were derived from her husband's illegal activities and where the wife did not know that those monies were the husband's criminal booty. The Court of Appeals basically answered “yes,” finding that a spouse who negotiated her settlement agreement in good faith and exchanged “fair consideration” for the assets that she received is entitled to keep the money, irrespective of the source. Therefore, according to the Court of Appeals, the government must obtain the funds to make the fraud victims whole from somewhere other than from the innocent, recipient spouse.
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.
This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.
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.