Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Anyone who has handled a custody or equitable distribution case knows that expert witness testimony may be necessary at trial with regard to the disputed custody or valuation issues. The Civil Practice Law and Rules require counsel to lay a preliminary foundation for the introduction of expert testimony at trial, if a proper demand is made. However, many attorneys never make such a demand, so their adversary is free to offer such testimony. Attorneys who serve a demand are often successful in precluding such testimony when their demand goes unanswered.
The Uniform Rules also require counsel to lay a preliminary foundation for the introduction of expert testimony well in advance of trial. However, as a general rule, many judges do not insist upon compliance with these rules, and many attorneys ignore them. It is important to know these rules in order to assure that you will be permitted to present expert testimony at trial, and to prevent its introduction into evidence by your adversary. Trial counsel should be familiar with the importance of serving a Notice to Identify Experts (herein, “Notice”) — used to obtain identifying information on the experts the opposing party intends to call at trial – on an adversary well in advance of the trial.
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.
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.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.