Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
HealthSouth Executives Implicated in Government Probe
Guilty pleas have been entered for the first time under new Sarbanes-Oxley Provisions. On April 5, 2003, the New York Times reported that Richard Scrushy, former Chief Executive Officer for HealthSouth Corporation, the largest provider of diagnostic imaging, outpatient surgery, and rehabilitation services with locations in 50 states and abroad, has been targeted by regulators for allegedly helping to overstate the company's earnings by more than $2 billion during the past 6 years. Bill Hicks, an SEC attorney, was quoted as stating that Scrushy “could be forced to pay $785 million or more if he loses a government lawsuit accusing him and the company of fraud,” and that “[i]t could go up if we find more insider trading or more profiting from the fraud.” Eight former HealthSouth executives have plead guilty so far, including pleas from both a former and the current financial officer of the chain in late March 2003, under the new Sarbanes-Oxley measures. See “Sarbanes Oxley Claims First CFO,” SmartPros (March 28, 2003).
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.