Uphill Battle
The June Supreme Court ruling that gutted the honest services fraud doctrine was actually a response to three separate cases, involving former Enron CEO Jeffrey ...
August 19, 2010 at 08:00 PM
4 minute read
The June Supreme Court ruling that gutted the honest services fraud doctrine was actually a response to three separate cases, involving former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling, Alaska legislator Bruce Weyhrauch and media baron Conrad Black, respectively. (Skilling v. United States was the lead case.)
Although the ruling is a victory for the plaintiffs, it's not an end to their legal troubles. The cases have been remanded for reconsideration.
The case against Skilling hinged on earnings manipulation. Prosecutors conflated that securities fraud charge with honest services fraud. Now the lower court will have to sort out whether the jury in its ruling differentiated between those issues.
“That's a really tricky analysis because you can't put the jury back in the room years later and say, 'OK, time to go at it again,'” says Joshua Berman, a white collar partner at Katten Muchin Rosenman. “The judge will essentially have to parse the jury instructions that were given, the proof that was established at trial, and in some ways make assumptions about what the jury did. It will be difficult now for the government to push hard on the other charges that Skilling was convicted on. I think it's an uphill battle.”
The ruling in Skilling won't just affect the Black and Weyhrauch cases but could be grounds for appealing or reopening other white-collar cases. Parts of the cases against former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich and former New York State Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno involved honest services fraud violations.
The June Supreme Court ruling that gutted the honest services fraud doctrine was actually a response to three separate cases, involving former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling, Alaska legislator Bruce Weyhrauch and media baron Conrad Black, respectively. (Skilling v. United States was the lead case.)
Although the ruling is a victory for the plaintiffs, it's not an end to their legal troubles. The cases have been remanded for reconsideration.
The case against Skilling hinged on earnings manipulation. Prosecutors conflated that securities fraud charge with honest services fraud. Now the lower court will have to sort out whether the jury in its ruling differentiated between those issues.
“That's a really tricky analysis because you can't put the jury back in the room years later and say, 'OK, time to go at it again,'” says Joshua Berman, a white collar partner at
The ruling in Skilling won't just affect the Black and Weyhrauch cases but could be grounds for appealing or reopening other white-collar cases. Parts of the cases against former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich and former
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 AllInside Track: How 2 Big Financial Stories—an Antitrust Case and a Megamerger—Became Intertwined
Trump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readA Blueprint for Targeted Enhancements to Corporate Compliance Programs
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 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