Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 69

Proposed amendments to sentencing guidelines issued

Fox Rothschild LLP
-
USA
-
February 28 2010

On January 21, 2010, the US Sentencing Commission (the "Commission") issued a notice of proposed amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines, which included amendments to the guidelines regarding the sentencing of organizations accused and convicted of criminal wrongdoing

CFO has no fiduciary duty to correct another officer's statements to the market

Fox Rothschild LLP
-
USA
-
April 9 2010

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals this week reaffirmed the limited circumstances under which a duty to disclose arises under Rule 10b-5, rejecting in a criminal case the Government's theory that a fiduciary duty attaches to "high corporate executives" obliging them to correct alleged misstatements by others in management

Victim of securities fraud successfully relies on SEC protective order to shield tax information from IRS

Fox Rothschild LLP
-
USA
-
April 6 2010

There are a variety of circumstances under which investors may provide sensitive tax-related information to the Securities and Exchange Commission: they may be victims of securities fraud eager to assist the SEC in recovering lost monies or, under the SEC's newly-developed policy of encouraging and rewarding cooperation, they may be low-level participants in the fraud anxious to prove their bona fides

Critical defense exhibits excluded for failure to comply with Rule 16(b) reciprocal discovery obligations

Fox Rothschild LLP
-
USA
-
January 1 2010

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(b) imposes discovery requirements on the defense which are triggered when the government complies with its own, initial disclosure obligations

Department of Justice dismisses criminal charges against UBS

Fox Rothschild LLP
-
USA
-
October 22 2010

The Justice Department on October 22 dismissed criminal charges against the Swiss bank, UBS AG, which had been accused of helping thousands of Americans evade US taxes in the billions of dollars by concealing their assets in foreign accounts

Fifth Circuit pulls back the reach of 18 U.S.C. 666 as it relates to bribery of local judges

Fox Rothschild LLP
-
USA
-
January 18 2010

Long a favorite weapon of federal prosecutors, Section 666 of Title 18 makes it a crime for an agent of a state or local organization or agency to corruptly demand, offer, or accept anything of value of $5,000 or more in connection with any business or transaction of the organization or agency, where the organization or agency receives annual benefits in excess of $10,000 under a federal program

Section 666 requires no quid pro quo in order to convict state official of bribery, the Eleventh Circuit holds

Fox Rothschild LLP
-
USA
-
June 13 2010

We have noted in these electronic pages the first stirrings of what may be a trend in the courts of appeal to limit the reach of 18 U.S.C. 666 -- which prohibits theft and bribery in local government programs which receive federal funds to true agents of state government

Department of Justice releases guidance on corporate monitor disputes and federal sentencing decisions

Fox Rothschild LLP
-
USA
-
June 17 2010

The U.S. Department of Justice (Department) recently issued statements that clarify and revise existing Department policy on two significant issues

Exploiting government-funded schools program constitutes fraud, even though no regulations were violated

Fox Rothschild LLP
-
USA
-
November 23 2010

A consultant assisting local schools in obtaining federally-distributed funds intended to facilitate Internet connectivity at the schools was charged with defrauding the program, even though the funding applications which she prepared did not violate any of the regulations of the program

Third Circuit permits government to bolster informant's credibility by introducing testimony about other convictions in same sting operation

Fox Rothschild LLP
-
USA
-
November 1 2010

In a recent post here we commented on the perplexing affirmance in a recent case in which the Third Circuit agreed that a government cooperating witness could speculate in his testimony regarding what a defendant knew or thought in a given conversation about the accuracy of tax returns signed by that defendant

next >