Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Contours of Bribery Analyzed By Second Circuit In Bank Corruption Case
Since the 1980s, the U.S. Supreme Court has sought to clarify the boundaries of federal bribery and corruption law. The overall effect has been to complicate, perhaps even curtail, such prosecutions. This pattern began with McNally v. United States, 483 U.S. 350 (1987), which limited the scope of the mail/wire fraud statutes, and continued after Congress enacted the "honest services" statute (18 U.S.C. §1346), through Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S. 358 (2010), McDonnell v. United States, 579 U.S. 550 (2016), Kelly v. United States, 590 U.S. —, 140 S. Ct. 1565 (2020), and last term in Ciminelli v. United States, 598 U.S. 306 (2023) and Percoco v. United States, 598 U.S. 319 (2023).
Bribes and kickbacks of public and private officials in the United States are still prosecuted under the mail/wire fraud statutes and the Hobbs Act, but departures from paradigmatic cases have become more vulnerable to challenge.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit's recent affirmance in the case of a bank officer convicted of corruption is noteworthy when viewed against that backdrop. United States v. Calk, 87 F.4th 164 (2d Cir. 2023). In that case, Stephen Calk was charged with "corruptly" causing a bank to make loans to Paul Manafort in exchange for help securing a position in the Trump administration. The prosecution was brought under 18 U.S.C. §215(a)(2), a statute that prohibits bribery in connection with the business of a financial institution.
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?