Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The first part of this series, published last month, addressed the definition of trade secrets in the context of discovery. As efforts to obtain trade secret information increase, a clear definition of trade secret is vital for the courts to analyze this issue correctly. This second installment addresses that analysis, and the standards and terminology courts apply to decide whether trade secrets should be disclosed, the arguments and evidence that parties resisting this discovery can present to the trial court, and strategies to limit the potential for additional damage if trade secrets are ordered produced.
Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.
Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.
Features
Most criminal defendants are advised against testifying at trial, but white-collar defendants usually must testify. Since state of mind is a key element in many business crimes, often the most important issue is what the defendant intended in taking (or failing to take) a specific action. The defendant's best hope may be to look jurors in the eye and convince them of his or her innocent state of mind. Besides, jurors tend to think that anyone wrongly accused would take the stand to proclaim his or her innocence.
Features
With deficits plaguing the federal budget, prosecutors might be expected to concentrate their efforts on enforcing U.S. tax laws. Yet federal prosecutors have recently brought charges under the mail and wire fraud statutes (18 U.S.C. '' 1341, 1343) in cases involving the evasion of foreign taxes. Foreign governments themselves have brought civil suits under the RICO statute (18 U.S.C. ''1961 et seq.), on the theory that the evasion of foreign taxes constitutes a predicate act of mail or wire fraud. The courts have split on whether this works. Generally, RICO claims by foreign governments have failed. Criminal prosecutions for fraud and money laundering have been upheld by the Second and Fourth Circuits, but rejected by the First Circuit. The issue may soon reach the Supreme Court.
Much has been written, in this newsletter and elsewhere, about the dilemma faced by corporations that want to cooperate with a government investigation by acceding to government "requests" for information protected by the attorney-client and work product privileges, while at the same time attempting to protect the otherwise privileged information from disclosure to the litigious world at large. Recent turf battles between federal and state prosecutors and regulators have only made more difficult any attempt to resolve the tension between two perceived needs: to cooperate, and to preserve confidentiality.
Features
Many franchise agreements begin with an introductory paragraph, a "witnesseth" statement or various recitals that tout the virtues of the franchisor's business or systems. These introductory statements might state that the franchisor has "developed a proven system," "developed and perfected a system," or "developed a uniform system" for operating a particular type of business. The introductory statements also might highlight the success, reputation, or positive image of the franchisor's business systems.
Highlights of the latest franchising cases from around the country.
Highlights of the latest franchising news from around the country.
On Oct. 12, 2003, then-California Gov. Gray Davis signed Senate Bill 796 into law and created a new private right of action for California employees to enforce most provisions of the Labor Code (with the exception of certain workers' compensation provisions). S.B. 796 will likely have significant implications for all California employers, both for franchisors with either company-owned or franchised units in California, and franchisees operating in the state.
