Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com 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 Jodi Misher Peikin and Jacob Mermelstein
The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Liu v. Securities and Exchange Commission to address a question that, until fairly recently, seemed clear: whether the SEC has authority to obtain disgorgement in civil actions to enforce the federal securities laws.
By Robert J. Anello and Richard F. Albert
In recent years, practitioners have observed a tension between criminal enforcement of the broadly written terms of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 and the modern Supreme Court’s notions of statutory interpretation and due process in the criminal law context. A certiorari petition filed in late August in Sanchez et al. v. United States, asks the Supreme Court to address this tension, as embodied in the judge-made per se rule.
By Sareena Malik Sawhney
Over the past few years, defense attorneys have been turning to forensic accountants significantly more often in white-collar cases. An experienced and skilled forensic accountant is valuable to the defense team by casting reasonable doubt on the issue of intent and uncovering other evidence in support of innocence or a reduced sentence.
By Juliet Gunev
Maryland Jury Convicts Former Executive on FCPA Charges for Bribing Russian Official to Win Nuclear Fuel Transportation Contracts