Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On May 29, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lagos v. United States, 584 U.S. ___ (2018), that corporate victims of criminal offenses cannot recover expenses incurred from internal investigations that the federal government has neither requested nor required under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996, 18 U.S.C. §3663A (MVRA). In its decision, the Court declined to address whether, going forward, such victims can recover costs from internal investigations initiated at the government’s behest under the statute. Prior to this holding, a number of federal courts held that corporate victims were eligible for restitution for the costs incurred from their internal investigations and referrals to law enforcement — regardless of whether the government requested or required such investigations. These courts ordered restitution to reflect these costs on grounds that internal investigations: 1) are a foreseeable result of the crimes enumerated in the MVRA; and 2) provide invaluable assistance to government investigations and proceedings.
*May exclude premium content
By Robert G. Heim
AI currently is playing a growing role in helping white-collar lawyers and their clients analyze vast amounts of data to uncover insights, connections, and patterns that would be impossible to detect through manual reviews. This article provides an introduction to AI technology and discusses the key regulatory developments practitioners should be aware of as they advise their clients on AI.
By Benjamin Rosenberg
Individual employees often act pursuant to advice from their in-house counsel. If named as a defendant in which her action is challenged, the employee may want to assert advice of corporate counsel as a defense. But the privilege belongs to the employer, not the employee, and the employer may refuse to waive the privilege. Can the court abrogate the employer’s privilege over the objection of the employer, and if so under what circumstances?
By Nate Robson
After much saber-rattling, the Biden administration’s focus on white-collar corporate compliance is finally coming into focus. Law firms and white-collar compliance experts have long warned the administration’s ramped-up focus was coming, but the pandemic largely nixed any initiatives. A spate of recent settlements coupled with the addition of a new white-collar leader at the U.S. Department of Justice is giving the public a look into what compliance will look like under Biden.
By Jessica Mach
Employment attorneys say the breadth of new state laws — and the pace at which they are going into effect — means in-house counsel at companies trying to create workarounds for employees in states with restrictive abortion laws by providing benefits that would allow them to travel out-of-state to access abortion services will need to be on high alert, since keeping up on top of the laws will be key to limiting their exposure to litigation — or even criminal penalties.