Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Treasury Department announced on June 18 that it will extend the “make available” provisions of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) through 2005, the third year of the federal Terrorism Risk Insurance Program.
The “make available” provisions require that, from the date of enactment (Nov. 26, 2002) through the last day of the second year of the program (Dec. 31, 2004), each insurer must make available, in all of its commercial property and casualty insurance policies, coverage for losses due to covered acts of terrorism that does not differ materially from the terms, amounts and other coverage limitations applicable to losses arising from events other than acts of terrorism. This decision is triggered by the TRIA, which requires that the Secretary of the Treasury determine whether the “make available” provisions should be extended through the third and final year of the program by Sept. 1, 2004. Additionally, the TRIA mandates that the Treasury complete a study of the effectiveness and success of the overall Act by June 2005. This comprehensive study is independent from the “make available” determination.
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.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
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.