In February 2007 the Illinois Supreme Court in a unanimous decision held as a matter of first impression that a parent corporation could be directly liable for its negligence to the estates of two employees of its subsidiary corporation. <i>Forsythe v. Clark USA.</i> The Illinois Court relied extensively on the unanimous 1998 opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court in <i>U S v. Bestfoods.</i> Both courts limited the reach of their opinions by making explicit the common law principle that corporate shareholders are not generally liable for the acts and omissions of their subsidiaries in the absence of active involvement of the parent in those acts or omissions.
At times in the past decade, health care fraud seemed to be the top priority of the DOJ. Although nationally it's now been eclipsed by corporate accountability, the DOJ has focused on health care fraud and abuse in two of the nation's largest federal prosecutors' offices: Los Angeles and Houston. The Central District of California and the Southern District of Texas ' supposedly fraud and abuse hot spots ' are setting up dedicated Medicare Fraud Task Forces based on a model that enjoyed great success in the Southern District of Florida.
A recent Ninth Circuit decision vacating a conviction because the trial judge failed to recuse himself, and a pending recusal application by convicted executive Jamie Olis, remind us that sometimes defendants try to improve their judicial lot through recusal, though with little hope for success.
This article examines two issues that can arise when a company and its former officer or director are adverse to each other and one seeks access to potentially privileged documents of the other.
U.S. antitrust enforcement, once the impetus for numerous foreign blocking statutes, now epitomizes the type of global cooperation necessary for effective law enforcement. But the past six years offer potent counterexamples that highlight the dangers of unilateralism and disrespect for foreign sovereignty ' some relatively minor, others far more consequential.
While the duty of lawyers representing financial institutions in the U.S. is almost solely toward their clients, in the EU, lawyers have affirmative obligations to report suspected money-laundering activity to government authorities. In other words, lawyers may be involuntarily conscripted as enforcement agents or 'gatekeepers' at the institutions they represent. American lawyers in the European offices of U.S.-based 'international' law firms are not exempt.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.
“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.
Insiders (and others) in the private equity business are accustomed to seeing a good deal of discussion ' academic and trade ' on the question of the appropriate methods of valuing private equity positions and securities which are otherwise illiquid. An interesting recent decision in the Southern District has been brought to our attention. The case is <i>In Re Allied Capital Corp.</i>, CCH Fed. SEC L. Rep. 92411 (US DC, S.D.N.Y., Apr. 25, 2003). Judge Lynch's decision is well written, the Judge reviewing a motion to dismiss by a business development company, Allied Capital, against a strike suit claiming that Allied's method of valuing its portfolio failed adequately to account for i) conditions at the companies themselves and ii) market conditions. The complaint appears to be, as is often the case, slap dash, content to point out that Allied revalued some of its positions, marking them down for a variety of reasons, and the stock price went down - all this, in the view of plaintiff's counsel, amounting to violations of Rule 10b-5.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
While the DOJ Civil Cyber-Fraud Initiative is still in its early stages and cybersecurity regulations are evolving, whistleblower plaintiffs have already begun leveraging the FCA to pursue alleged noncompliance with government cybersecurity requirements.
