Skadden's Foreign-Lobbying Settlement Is Off-Limits at Greg Craig's Trial
The government has agreed it won't use Skadden's settlement agreement with the government, nor the law firm's retroactive FARA registration as evidence at the trial.
April 26, 2019 at 10:50 AM
3 minute read
Federal prosecutors have agreed not to offer as evidence at Greg Craig's trial the settlement his former law firm, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, reached in January to resolve claims that it failed to disclose past work for the Russia-aligned government of Ukraine.
Craig, a former Skadden partner in Washington who earlier served as the top lawyer in the Obama White House, is charged in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia with misleading authorities about his preparation of a report on the prosecution of Yulia Tymoshenko, a former prime minister of Ukraine and political rival of the country's president at the time, Viktor Yanuovych. Craig, represented by a team from Zuckerman Spaeder, contends he was not required to disclose his work under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, an 80-year-old law requiring the disclosure of lobbying work for foreign governments and other overseas interests.
Craig has pleaded not guilty. His trial, which is expected to last two weeks, is set to begin Aug. 12.
In January, Skadden agreed to pay $4.6 million to resolve U.S. Justice Department claims that the law firm violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, for work it conducted for Ukraine beginning in 2012. Skadden retroactively registered as a foreign agent of the Ukrainian government. The settlement amount represented the firm's earnings from the Tymoshenko report.
“We believe that, based on this agreement, neither the Settlement Agreement nor the Skadden FARA filings will be raised by either party in any way during Mr. Craig's trial,” according to the filing submitted on Friday by Craig's lawyers and the prosecution team. “However, each party reserves the right to ask the court for permission to introduce this evidence in rebuttal and/or in response to any argument or evidence offered by the other party that makes it relevant to the jury's determination of the charges.”
The testimony agreement, which still requires the approval of Judge Amy Berman Jackson, includes a stipulation that the government will limit the scope of testimony for two unidentified witnesses.
Craig's defense team said it will not elicit testimony from one of those witnesses regarding communication with Craig after Jan. 16, 2014, and the government will not seek to cross-examine a witness about communication and events that occurred after Jan. 16, 2014.
The government said it won't introduce Skadden's retroactive registration as a foreign agent for Ukraine.
Sealed proceedings were held earlier in front of U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell in Washington over attorney-client privilege matters involving Craig. Jackson first noted those proceedings in an order last week. She had planned to review that litigation, but she said Friday that there is no need for her to do so at this time.
Read the notice filed Friday in D.C. federal court:
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
© 2025 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 AllUS Courts Announce Closures in Observance of Jimmy Carter National Mourning Day
2 minute read'Erroneous Assumption'?: Apple Challenges DOJ Antitrust Remedy in Google Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Milbank, Wachtell, Ropes and Pittsburgh Duo Aim to Save Nippon Steel-U.S. Steel Merger
- 2A Top Connecticut Lawyer Has Resigned
- 3Just Ahead of Oral Argument, Fubo Settles Antitrust Case with Disney, Fox, Warner Bros.
- 4Best Practices for Adopting and Adapting to AI: Mitigating Risk in Light of Increasing Regulatory and Shareholder Scrutiny
- 5FOMO Run Amok? Resolve of Firms Chasing AI Dreams Tested by Sky-High Costs
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