Online: Investigate Product Safety on the Web
March 29, 2006
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from more than 15,000 types of consumer products under the agency's jurisdiction. It works to ensure the safety of consumer products — such as toys, cribs, power tools, cigarette lighters, and household chemicals, and claims it has contributed significantly to the 30% decline in the rate of deaths and injuries associated with consumer products over the past 30 years. The site, <i>www.cpsc.gov</i>, offers information (in English and Spanish) that could help protect consumers and families from products that pose a fire, electrical, chemical, or mechanical hazard, or can injure children.
Risk Management: What Your Firm May be Missing
March 29, 2006
In today's increasingly complex and regulated business environment, hundreds of different risks threaten law firms. While some of them can lead to malpractice claims that could destroy a firm's reputation and finances, others can be physically or operationally devastating.<br>Before a firm can begin to manage risk, it is important to define risk. In my many conversations with managing partners, executive directors or law firm CFOs, they all generally seem to think of risk in terms of insurance (malpractice, workers comp, business interruption, etc). While I agree this is one area of risk, the overall definition of risk is much broader. Risk is the potential for any issue to negatively affect an entity's ability to meet its objectives.
Can Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c) Even the Playing Field?
March 29, 2006
As the pace and scale of federal white-collar prosecutions grow, an inherent inequality in the process threatens the fundamental fairness of the criminal justice system: the uneven access to information. The government typically spends years investigating with the grand jury and using subpoena powers, immunity offers, and foreign treaties to gather virtually any document or testimony it wants. Moreover, because the government has no obligation to subpoena exculpatory records, it can purposely sanitize its case, avoiding subpoenaing documents that are helpful to the defendant.
Another View: Corporate Cooperation Taken to New Lows
March 29, 2006
The Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) entered into between KPMG and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York on Aug. 29, 2005, is just the latest example of the federal government's perverting the notion of corporate cooperation, so that 'cooperation' means uttering only the words that the government authorizes. Corpora-tions are increasingly faced with the option of being put out of business or capitulating to the demands of overzealous prosecutors who possess seemingly unchecked powers. The ability of prosecutors to force corporations to accept a full complement of draconian provisions too frequently results in individual employees' being left behind to take the fall for the 'good' of the company. KPMG's acceptance of the terms of the DPA is a clear example of how these prosecutorial powers can strip individuals of their constitutional rights.
Case Notes
March 29, 2006
Highlights of the latest product liability cases from around the country.
CPSC Gets Aggressive About Failure to Report
March 29, 2006
In the last few years, the compliance staff of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has sought a number of significant civil penalties for failure to report or for late reporting. It is instructive to look at recent civil penalty cases to see what is important to the CPSC staff in assessing the appropriateness and level of penalties. First, however, let's examine the reporting requirements.
Compliance Tips from Deferred Prosecution Agreements
March 29, 2006
In recent years, increasing numbers of large corporations have, in the hope of avoiding a conviction and all the ramifications a conviction entails, entered into Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) with the Department of Justice (DOJ). Much has been written about the lack of bargaining power companies have in negotiating these deals, and about the onerous nature of some of their terms. In this article, we suggest that companies can use the DPAs entered into by others to their advantage by treating them as guides to assist them in formulating their own compliance programs. Not only should this result in strengthened programs, but should a compliance problem nevertheless arise, having a 'government-issued' program in place could provide a company with a strong argument that it has done the most it can in formulating an effective program and hence should not be subject to prosecution.
Does Your Client Owe a Duty to Protect the Public from the Misconduct of Third Parties?
March 29, 2006
The April 19, 1995 Oklahoma City bombing stunned the nation, not only because of the horrific nature of the act itself, but because no one thought that products as common as agricultural fertilizer and motor-racing fuel could be used to incinerate a federal building. Six years later, the 9/11 terrorist attacks again sent the nation into shock at the idea that a group of people would commit a suicide attack by taking control of four planes and crashing them into multiple buildings. These violent attacks are proof that common products are being used, and oftentimes manipulated, in an improper manner for improper uses. Consequently, the victims of such attacks are suing manufacturers and handlers of these common products for alleged negligence, even though a third party committed the act in question. If your client is a manufacturer or handler of a product, how can you help protect it from liability?
