Intent, Not Accounting, May Be Key to Dewey Trial
For more than two months, prosecutors in the Dewey & LeBoeuf criminal trial have walked jurors through Byzantine accounting adjustments applied after the firm was created through a 2007 merger. But in the end, some criminal defense experts say, it may not matter how Dewey was allegedly fudging its numbers. What matters is the who—and the why.
August 07, 2015 at 05:00 AM
5 minute read
For more than two months, prosecutors in the Dewey & LeBoeuf criminal trial have walked jurors through Byzantine accounting adjustments applied after the firm was created through a 2007 merger. The Manhattan district attorney's case revolves around accounting and the argument that the firm's leaders used it to deceive lenders and partners before Dewey's collapse in 2012.
Lawyers for the defendants—former chairman Steven Davis, former executive director Stephen DiCarmine, and ex-chief financial officer Joel Sanders—have tried to sow doubt as to whether those maneuvers were actually illegal.
But in the end, some criminal defense experts say, it may not matter how Dewey was allegedly fudging its numbers. What matters is the who—and the why.
This content has been archived.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 All
Decision of the Day: Uber Cannot Be Held Vicariously Liable for Driver's Alleged Negligent Conduct
US Courts Announce Closures in Observance of Jimmy Carter National Mourning Day
2 minute read
Class Certification, Cash-Sweep Cases Among Securities Litigation Trends to Watch in 2025
6 minute read
Latest Class of Court Officers Sworn Into Service in New York
Trending Stories
- 1Lawyer's Retirement Benefits Excluded From Marital Property
- 2'David and Goliath' Dispute Between Software Developers Ends in $24M Settlement
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up the Corporate Transparency Act: Recent Litigation and Potential Next Steps
- 4Brogdon: The Final Nail in Corbin’s Coffin in Premises Cases
- 5What to Know About the New 'Overlapping Directorship' Antitrust Development
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
