Disclosing Client Confidences - An Update
November 01, 2004
In the February 2003 edition of this Bulletin, I commented on the then recently issued "final" Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Rules on Standards of Professional Conduct for Attorneys. The "final" rules were not in fact final, because the SEC both had sought additional comments on the rules and had proposed, and sought comments on, a modified form of its controversial proposed "noisy withdrawal" rules. Since then, there has been no further word from the SEC about when and how a lawyer for a company or business executive is required or permitted to report client misconduct to a third party, including regulators and law enforcement authorities. But that does not mean all has been quiet. Significant changes have been made by the ABA to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct in this area and by international organizations wrestling with the role of lawyers in anti-money laundering compliance efforts.
Document Destruction Horror Stories
November 01, 2004
Three recent cases involving government inquiries provide sobering lessons about electronic evidence to corporations and their lawyers. The most notorious, <i>U.S. v. Arthur Andersen, LLP</i>, resulted in criminal convictions. Another, <i>In the Matter of Banc of America Securities LLC</i>, involved SEC enforcement action. The third, <i>United States v. Philip Morris</i>, arose in a Department of Justice civil suit. If nothing else, the cases demonstrate that corporations exposed to such investigations must implement effective and well-maintained information management systems.
In The Courts
November 01, 2004
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
Jury Selection and Media Access
November 01, 2004
For laypersons and lawyers alike, the trial of Martha Stewart last winter was irresistible legal theater. But if, between all the discussions of Ms. Stewart's courtroom attire and lunchtime dining habits, you missed seeing how the district court and Second Circuit wrestled with the issue of media access to jury selection, you may want to give <i>ABC, Inc. v. Stewart</i>, 360 F.3d 90 (2d Cir. 2004) a read.
Special Issue: Securities Enforcement Actions After SOX
September 30, 2004
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) was created by Congress in the aftermath of the 1929 stock market crash, the cause of which was widely attributed to fraudulent and deceptive practices on Wall Street. It is an independent regulatory agency whose five commissioners, including a Chairman, are appointed by the President. The SEC's Division of Enforcement is the "police force" of the Commission; it is responsible for the civil and administrative enforcement of the various federal securities laws. The Enforcement Division also typically works closely with U.S. Attorney's Offices throughout the country to assist with the criminal prosecution of securities violations.
Introduction
September 30, 2004
Special Issue: As we all know, as a result of widespread accounting scandals in 2001-02, Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-204, 116 Stat. 769 (2002) (SOX). SOX, signed into law on July 30, 2002, authorizes substantially increased funding for the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, creates broad new SEC enforcement powers, a greater range and magnitude of civil and criminal penalties, several new criminal prohibitions and more rigorous reporting requirements among other things.
In The Courts
September 30, 2004
Recent rulings you need to know.
Prosecutions for Violation of Export Controls on Dual-Use Items
September 30, 2004
Since 9/11, the government has stepped up the enforcement of laws and regulations relating to the control of exports, especially so-called "dual-use" items that have both military and non-military applications. Department of Commerce policy "seeks to keep terrorists and other criminals from possessing sensitive technologies -- in essence, to prevent export violations before they occur," according to Julie L. Myers, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement.
