Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Evolving Rules Governing the Use of Investigators
Most attorneys involved in the investigation or defense of complex business crimes will turn to private investigators to assist them in developing the facts. Given the breadth and nature of many modern criminal investigations, the use of private investigators is almost becoming a necessity. Yet many basic rules governing their use are unclear or in flux, especially when it comes to monitoring or gathering electronic information. The consequences of an ill-supervised or, even worse, unlawful investigation can range from the exclusion of evidence to criminal prosecution, always with the risk of severe reputational damage to the client on whose behalf the work is performed. In this article, we identify some key issues to guide attorneys in this important area.
General Ethical Limitations
Any work performed on behalf of an attorney, including work performed by investigators, will be subject to the rules of ethics. Because the use of investigators often involves surreptitious activity or deception, attorneys supervising investigators must be careful not to run afoul of the ethical rules against deceptive conduct. In New York, for example, DR 1-102(a)(4) provides that 'a lawyer or law firm shall not engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation,' and under DR 7-102(a)(5), a lawyer may not 'knowingly make a false statement of law or fact.' Moreover, the investigator may interact with individuals or entities represented by counsel with respect to the subject matter of the investigation, and DR 7-104(a)(1) generally prohibits not only lawyers but also their representatives from communicating with the clients of other lawyers. The New York rules have equivalents in most other jurisdictions.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- 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
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
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
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
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?
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?