Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP has announced that Robert Shulman has joined the firm's Washington, DC office as a partner in the Insurance Recovery Practice Group. Shulman comes to the firm from Kasowitz Benson Torres & Friedman LLP.
Shulman has more than 30 years of experience in the insurance recovery area. His practice includes litigating on behalf of corporations and in complex disputes with insurance companies regarding coverage for environmental claims, products claims, asbestos and other large-scale tort claims, construction claims, directors' and officers' claims, securities-related claims, hurricane-related claims, and claims for business interruption losses. He also is experienced in class action litigation, including opposing certification as well as the development and implementation of both certification and the merits. He has represented clients in cases designated for multidistrict coordination and has experience in all forms of alternative dispute resolution in the context of a wide range of matters.
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.