Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On July 18, 2019, a federal grand jury in Cincinnati indicted the former compliance officer of a pharmaceutical distributor, James Barclay, the pharmaceutical distributor, and others with conspiring to illegally distribute controlled substances. Among other things, the indictment alleged that Barclay, who was responsible for supervising the distributor's compliance with drug laws, and others sold millions of painkiller pills to pharmacies, while regularly exceeding the company's internal threshold limits and ignoring obvious signs of diversion and abuse. When the company's internal suspicious order monitoring system flagged many of these orders, Barclay and other defendants allegedly failed to conduct any due diligence or report the suspicious orders to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), as required by law. The Barclay indictment was issued around three months after federal prosecutors in Manhattan brought felony criminal charges against a different drug distributor, its former Chief Compliance Officer (CCO), William Pietruszewski, and others on allegations that they opened new customer accounts without conducting due diligence and sold customers controlled substances despite knowing they were being distributed for illegitimate purposes. On April 19, 2019, Pietruszewski pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute controlled substances, conspiracy to defraud the U.S., and willful failure to file suspicious order reports with the DEA.
These high-profile criminal actions against compliance officers provide a powerful reminder that they remain in the crosshairs of U.S. law enforcement authorities. Although some government officials, such as Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Commissioner Hester Peirce, have indicated support for deferring to the judgment of compliance officers in most cases, recent government investigations and enforcement actions raise concerns about where regulators will draw the line.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.