The verdict in the Arthur Andersen obstruction of justice trial raises some big questions about how in-house lawyers should give advice.
Jurors who found the Chicago-based accounting firm guilty of obstruction of justice in June discounted evidence of shredding and rested their verdict on a document altered on the advice of in-house lawyer Nancy Temple. Temple’s lawyer says she was simply doing her job when she sent an e-mail in October 2001 to Andersen partner David Duncan suggesting some changes to a draft memorandum he had prepared about the Enron Corp.’s third-quarter earnings report.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
