Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the Courts
Fraud Convictions Vacated for District Judge's Evidentiary Errors
On Jan. 25, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated the convictions of Michael Baker and Michael Gluk, the former CEO and CFO of ArthroCare, respectively, and remanded for a new trial for their role in a $750 million securities fraud. United States v. Gluk, 2016 WL 304041 (5th Cir. 2016). The circuit court ruled that the district judge had wrongly excluded from evidence investigative reports prepared by a law firm and the SEC, while improperly allowing prosecutors to dwell on “salacious details” of an unrelated fraud at the company. Id. at 2.
Gluk and Baker were accused of overseeing a “channel-stuffing” scheme at ArthroCare, a medical device company headquartered in Austin, TX. The purpose of the scheme was to prop up the company's stock price by inflating sales and smoothing out earnings through fraudulent quarter-end transactions. In a typical channel-stuffing scheme, a company at risk of missing its quarterly earnings expectations will oversell product to a co-conspirator distributor, which then returns the unsold product in the next quarter. This allows the company to overstate its quarterly earnings, but this can quickly spiral out of control as the company must continually repeat the scheme in order to meet expectations.
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.
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?
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.