Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Understanding the Difference Between Advocacy and Obstruction When Facing Government Investigations

By Christopher D. Carusone
May 01, 2024

Franklin Brown, Steven Woghin, Lauren Stevens. All three attorneys rose to the top of the in-house counsel ranks at their companies. All three faced unprecedented challenges when their companies came under federal investigation. Most importantly, all three were accused of obstruction of justice in how they handled their companies' responses to government investigations. As executive vice president and chief legal counsel for Rite-Aid Corp., Brown was accused of attempting to deceive government investigators and the law firm hired to perform an internal investigation into the manipulation of the company's financial statements by coaching witnesses to lie and backdating contracts. Ditto for Woghin, senior vice president and general counsel of Computer Associates International Inc. As vice president and associate general counsel of GlaxoSmithKline, Stevens was accused (but later exonerated at trial) of concealing evidence and making false statements to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigating the company's off-label promotion of Wellbutrin.

In light of these cases, and others, corporate counsel must understand the difference between advocacy and obstruction when facing government investigations.

|

Obstruction Under Federal Law

Laws prohibiting obstruction of justice can be found throughout the U.S. Code, depending on the subject matter and regulatory scheme involved. However, many more commonly used statutes prohibiting obstruction generally reside in the Crimes Code, Chapter 73, 18 U.S.C. Section 1501 et seq. These laws apply to federal proceedings before the judiciary, executive departments/agencies, and Congress and are not limited to criminal investigations. Putting aside the more obvious forms of criminality (such as the use of threats/violence, witness intimidation, and jury tampering), the laws most relevant to corporate counsel guiding the company through a federal investigation are those prohibiting tampering with witnesses and physical evidence.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers Image

In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

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.

CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit Image

Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.

The Power of Your Inner Circle: Turning Friends and Social Contacts Into Business Allies Image

Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.