Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Franchisees and Dealers Should Plead Causation In Actions Against The Government
In a decision that may significantly expand the ability of franchised entities to bring Fifth Amendment claims, the United States Court of Federal Claims has held that dealerships have stated plausible causes of action against the federal government in the case of Colonial Chevrolet Co., Inc. v. United States, Nos. 10-647C, 11-100C, and 12-900C, 2015 WL 5268941 (Fed. Cl. Sept. 9, 2015). The decision solidifies that claims against the government may lie where the government's conduct vis-'-vis a third party effects a taking of a plaintiff's property right ' which may include a franchise or dealership agreement. The ruling offers a roadmap that franchisees and dealers advancing takings claims should follow, and will likely be of interest to former General Motors and Chrysler Group dealers that lost their dealerships as a result of the Troubled Asset Relief Plan (TARP).
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.