Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Summary Judgment for Domino's in Death of Franchisee's Employee: Will It Last?
Lind, et al v. Domino's Pizza LLC, et al, Bus. Franchise Guide (CCH) ' 15,567 (Appeals Court of Massachusetts, Hampden, July 29, 2015), is a case in which a Massachusetts intermediate appellate court affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant Domino's Pizza entities in a wrongful death action brought by the administrators of the estate of a Domino's franchisee's employee who was kidnapped, robbed and murdered during a late-night pizza delivery. Various theories of liability were proffered by the plaintiffs, including vicarious liability, negligence and contractual third-party beneficiary claims. Just before trial, the trial court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment on all issues and the plaintiffs appealed.
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.
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.
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.
This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.