Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Deferred Prosecution Agreements: What Questions Should We Be Asking?

By Joe Murphy
June 28, 2006

In the post-Enron era, corporate counsel are seeing more government investigations that lead to 'deferred prosecution agreements' (DPAs). In these arrangements, the government formally accuses a company of criminal conduct, but agrees to hold the prosecution in abeyance pending the company's efforts to make amends. These cases include such well-known names as KPMG, Computer Asso-ciates and Bristol Myers Squibb.

Why are these settlements suddenly coming onto the scene? In a sense, they are not entirely new. The reality of the corporate world is that major companies simply do not go to trial on criminal matters. Before DPAs, there were various forms of consent decrees, settlement agreements and corporate integrity agreements. The latest variation comes partly from a reference in the Thompson Memorandum advising federal prosecutors to consider this tool. From the government's perspective, these agreements provide enormous ongoing leverage: The company has agreed to what the government wants, it has admitted on the record that it engaged in wrongdoing, and any violation allows the government to use the company's admissions without new charges being filed. Companies avoid the uncertainty of trial, destructive publicity and the diversion of management's attention that comes with battling criminal charges. But what are the implications of this trend and the questions we should be asking?

Who Is Paying?

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions Image

UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?