Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
For companies suspected of wrongdoing, cooperating with Department of Justice (DOJ) investigations and self-disclosing their misconduct often appears to be their only option to avoid prosecution and reduce large financial penalties. But, these benefits often come at a price, especially to company employees who are caught in the middle. To gain cooperation credit for voluntary self-disclosure, companies are expected to identify all relevant facts relating to the individuals responsible for the alleged misconduct. And as part of demonstrating their cooperation to the government, companies often pressure their employees to submit to interviews, including with DOJ, or risk losing their jobs and/or indemnification of legal fees. Such scenarios, which have become prevalent in today’s corporate enforcement environment, place employees “between the rock and the whirlpool” by arguably coercing their testimony and infringing on their constitutional right against self-incrimination. See, Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493, 498 (1967).
*May exclude premium content
By Ross Benson and Robert N. Driscoll
Given the rapid expansion of interest and participation in cryptocurrency transactions, it’s not a matter of whether you have an interest in crypto, think it’s all a bizarre techno-bubble, the eventual replacement for fiat currency, or somewhere in between. The fact of the matter is your clients, and future clients, are more likely than ever to have a connection to this market, and a brief review of the headlines can make this prospect seem terrifying.
By Jacqueline C. Wolff and Michael Herrmann
The prevalent view is that telehealth will remain an integral part of our healthcare system post-PHE and may even continue to expand. And that means criminal and civil enforcement focused on fraud committed using, or furthered by the use of, telehealth will be expanding as well, particularly when one looks at the dollars that a regulator can bring in for fraud or noncompliance.
By Carolyn H. Kendall and Abraham J. Rein
Hillary Clinton's 2015 statement about the possibility of incarceration for employment-related failures was, to many, an alarming prospect. Since that time, this movement has grown, and has recently gained momentum. Today, prosecutors across the country increasingly seek criminal fines and jail time for what were previously seen as non-criminal labor violations.
By Elkan Abramowitz and Jonathan S. Sack
This article describes pending federal prosecutions, which level corruption charges against high-level officials, considers how the theories of prosecution in these cases might be viewed in light of court decisions in other public corruption cases, and concludes with some observations about the outer limits of federal public corruption prosecutions.