Harry Sandick

July 20, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Harry Sandick, of counsel at Schulte Roth & Zabel, and Justin Mendelsohn, an associate at the firm, write that the Supreme Court's decision in Melendez-Diaz v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts directly rejects the admissibility of only a single type of evidence - certified laboratory reports - but the Court's reasoning casts a broader shadow. Ultimately, the decision calls into question the procedure by which prosecutors lay a foundation for admission of business records via affidavits, a practice explicitly permitted by the Federal Rules of Evidence.

By Harry Sandick and Justin Mendelsohn

13 minute read

April 16, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Sung-Hee Suh, a partner at Schulte Roth & Zabel, and Harry Sandick, special counsel to the firm, write that New York SEC attorneys and federal prosecutors have been generally careful to keep the parallel tracks of the investigation from merging or have conducted joint investigations openly, so that potential defendants are aware of the risks. Only time will tell whether a recent appellate decision will be taken as invitation to expand the use of civil investigations as stalking horses for criminal probes.

By Sung-Hee Suh and Harry Sandick

13 minute read