'Information Security 101'
May 25, 2005
Recent headlines have reported a startling number of security breaches and information thefts. A major university notified 120,000 of its alumni after a computer containing fundraising information including addresses and Social Security numbers was hacked by an unknown intruder; a subsidiary of the Lexis Nexis group announced that the records of 32,000 individuals may have fallen into the hands of thieves using the passwords of legitimate subscribers; Bank of America reported the loss of backup tapes containing the financial records of up to 1.2 million federal employees; payroll outsourcer PayMaxx faced allegations that it had exposed 25,000 customer records, including W-2 information, online; and cell phone provider T-Mobile released information about a hacker who was able to exploit a security weakness in a commercial software package to access customer records, sensitive government documents, private e-mail and candid celebrity photos.
The Benefits of Booker for Cooperating Defendants
May 24, 2005
The Supreme Court's decision in <i>United States v. Booker</i>, 125 S.Ct. 738 (2005), brought significant changes to federal criminal procedure. Mandatory sentences under the federal Sentencing Guidelines (Guidelines) became advisory, and with this change came some subtle but important opportunities for criminal defendants who cooperate or provide "substantial assistance" in prosecutions. Now, convicted corporations and employees may be able to provide more input to courts about their cooperation with or assistance to the government. This may make sentencing judges more willing to grant downward departures from sentences calculated by Guidelines formulas.
The Corporate Attorney-Client Privilege Survives
May 24, 2005
The dangers to the proper functioning of the corporate attorney-client privilege in the wake of recent federal and state law enforcement activities have been well-documented and widely discussed. The year is only half over and already two reports on the issue have been produced and a third major inquiry is underway. A survey by the Association of Corporation Counsel disclosed that 30% of the respondents' corporate clients had "personally experienced an erosion in protections offered by privilege/work product." A similar survey of outside counsel conducted by the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers reported 47% of corporate clients had experienced such an erosion. Both organizations have taken up the difficult task of 'debunking the myth' that assertion of the privilege is inappropriate or a sign of guilt.
Enforcement Against Market-Driven Misconduct
May 24, 2005
Government plays a critical role in the design of some free markets and in the operation of many. The recent energy debacle in California resulted in part from defective governmental design of California's markets for wholesale and retail electricity. Even where markets are shaped largely by private-sector activity, government often has a critical role in influencing the incentives that guide conduct in those markets. In particular, law enforcement agencies, especially regulatory agencies, have a critical responsibility for the proper functioning of competitive markets within their jurisdiction -- the responsibility to elaborate and enforce applicable laws so as to constrain market forces from driving participants into socially undesirable conduct.
In The Courts
May 24, 2005
National rulings of interest to you and your practice.
Chapter 11 Plan Exclusivity under the Revised Code
May 24, 2005
The filing of a case under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code bestows certain "inalienable" rights upon a debtor. In addition to the hallmarks of a bankruptcy case, such as the automatic stay's "breathing space" and the "fresh start" of a discharge, debtors have traditionally enjoyed rather protracted periods of "plan exclusivity." Plan exclusivity, as it is commonly referred, is that period in a Chapter 11 case in which the debtor has the "exclusive" right to file a plan of reorganization. With the passage of the amendment to Bankruptcy Code section 1121, Congress has encroached upon this particular "inalienable" right.
Financial Contract Amendments to Bankruptcy Code
May 24, 2005
Esoteric and arcane, the financial contract provisions of the new Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 -- those dealing with repurchase agreements, securities contracts, swap agreements, forward and commodity contracts -- have been given short shrift by a mainstream media focused on the more "newsworthy" consumer provisions of that legislation. However, to bankruptcy practitioners focusing on larger commercial cases or involved in the capital markets, these amendments are important and deserve a close look.
What Happens to Chapter 11 Cases?
May 24, 2005
This Special Edition of <i>The Bankruptcy Strategist</i> is devoted entirely to the recently enacted "Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005," which makes the most sweeping changes to the Bankruptcy Code seen in the last 20 years (although the law does nothing to address some significant issues that have been much debated, such as asbestos, forum shopping, and pension liability). The legislation primarily takes aim at perceived consumer bankruptcy abuses, but will also affect numerous aspects of business bankruptcy practice. This article analyzes key changes to the Bankruptcy Code that will be important to most business bankruptcy participants. Other articles in this issue address in detail the changes related to cross-border insolvencies, executory contracts, financial contracts, investment bankers, and plan exclusivity. Neither we nor the other contributors to this edition have attempted to address the substantial changes affecting only individuals who file for Chapter 11 relief, or changes to the special provisions for "small business" and "single asset real estate" debtors, as those terms are defined in the Code.
Revisions to Bankruptcy Code Sections 365 and 366
May 24, 2005
Lessors of commercial property and providers of utility services should benefit from several key changes to the Code. Revisions to Sections 365 and 366 will provide lessors and utilities, respectively, with protections not found in the prior version of the Code.
