The Year in Review: #14. DOJ Backlash
For years bar organizations, business groups and civil liberties advocates criticized the DOJ's infamous Thompson Memo, which gave prosecutors free rein to demand waiver of ...
November 30, 2007 at 07:00 PM
4 minute read
For years bar organizations, business groups and civil liberties advocates criticized the DOJ's infamous Thompson Memo, which gave prosecutors free rein to demand waiver of attorney-client privilege when investigating suspected corporate wrongdoing and imposed harsh penalties on companies that didn't acquiesce to the demands of prosecutors.
Finally in December 2006, Larry Thompson's successor at the DOJ, Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, offered an olive branch. His new prosecutorial guidelines, dubbed the McNulty Memo, require prosecutors to obtain written approval before seeking privileged communications and forbid them from considering advancement of attorneys' fees to employees when making charging decisions.
But many perceived the salutary gesture as too little too late, and efforts to curb prosecutorial abuses marched forward in 2007. One of the movement's most dogged advocates is federal Judge Lewis Kaplan, who has used the high-profile tax fraud case against former KPMG partners to highlight–and dismantle–abusive DOJ tactics.
In July Kaplan dismissed the charges against 13 defendants, ruling that prosecutors violated their constitutional rights by pressuring KPMG to cut off legal fees. The case, which the DOJ once billed as the largest tax fraud prosecution in history, will go to trial in early 2008.
Other corporate defendants are already using Kaplan's opinions to combat the DOJ. Jailed former Dynegy exec Jamie Olis, for instance, is seeking to have his conviction overturned because prosecutors “sabotaged” his defense by keeping Dynegy from paying his legal fees.
And the pushback against the DOJ also has friends in other branches of the federal government. In January Sen. Arlen Specter introduced the Attorney-Client Privilege Protection Act of 2007 in Senate. The Act, which has received bipartisan support, would ban all government agents from conditioning deals or evaluating “cooperativeness” based on willingness to waive privilege.
Powerful forces in the legal community are rallying for the Act's passage. “[The McNulty Memo] will continue to cause a number of profoundly negative consequences,” says ABA President Karen Mathis. “[The Act] would strike the proper balance between law enforcement and the preservation of essential attorney-client privilege, work product and employee legal protections.”
For years bar organizations, business groups and civil liberties advocates criticized the DOJ's infamous Thompson Memo, which gave prosecutors free rein to demand waiver of attorney-client privilege when investigating suspected corporate wrongdoing and imposed harsh penalties on companies that didn't acquiesce to the demands of prosecutors.
Finally in December 2006, Larry Thompson's successor at the DOJ, Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, offered an olive branch. His new prosecutorial guidelines, dubbed the McNulty Memo, require prosecutors to obtain written approval before seeking privileged communications and forbid them from considering advancement of attorneys' fees to employees when making charging decisions.
But many perceived the salutary gesture as too little too late, and efforts to curb prosecutorial abuses marched forward in 2007. One of the movement's most dogged advocates is federal Judge
In July Kaplan dismissed the charges against 13 defendants, ruling that prosecutors violated their constitutional rights by pressuring
Other corporate defendants are already using Kaplan's opinions to combat the DOJ. Jailed former
And the pushback against the DOJ also has friends in other branches of the federal government. In January Sen. Arlen Specter introduced the Attorney-Client Privilege Protection Act of 2007 in Senate. The Act, which has received bipartisan support, would ban all government agents from conditioning deals or evaluating “cooperativeness” based on willingness to waive privilege.
Powerful forces in the legal community are rallying for the Act's passage. “[The McNulty Memo] will continue to cause a number of profoundly negative consequences,” says ABA President Karen Mathis. “[The Act] would strike the proper balance between law enforcement and the preservation of essential attorney-client privilege, work product and employee legal protections.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllOld Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Lawsuit Against Amazon Could Reshape E-Commerce Landscape
King Kullen—the Nation's First Supermarket—Hires Outside Counsel as GC
Trending Stories
- 1Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 2Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 3Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 4Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250