Since law enforcement is able to obtain business records, it would only make sense for federal agents to access records in national security cases from federal courts. The ACLU also argues that the Patriot Act was created for the government to spy on U.S. citizens. However, it was created for the capture terrorists and prevention of terrorism. By using “roving wiretaps” and searching through business records held by third parties, federal
The Park Doctrine Issue Concerning FDA’s prosecution of individuals for Corporate Misconduct, Park Doctrine, how does this legal doctrine implicate those who market to Corporations that manufacture FDA regulated products? Brief Answer Lubrizol’s Corporate Officers’ overall exposure to liability under the Park Doctrine would be limited. Our role as a supplier of raw materials to corporations that manufacture FDA Regulated Products insulates us from the Park Doctrine. While we supply raw materials to corporations whose products are regulated by the FDA, we play no role in the final manufacturing and/or use of those products. Facts The Park Doctrine, U.S. v. Park 421 U.S. 658, 95 S.Ct.
CASE 1.4 HEALTH MANAGEMENT, INC. Synopsis This case profiles an imaginative accounting fraud orchestrated by two top executives of Health Management, Inc. (HMI), a New York-based pharmaceuticals distributor. The HMI fraud is noteworthy because it led to the first major test of an important federal statute, the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PSLRA), that was intended to alleviate the growing burden of class-action lawsuits filed against accounting firms and other third parties under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. (The PSLRA amended key provisions of the 1934 Act.) The PSLRA makes it more difficult for plaintiffs to successfully “plead” a case under the 1934 Act, that is, to have such a lawsuit proceed to trial. Among other provisions in the PSLRA is a proportionate liability rule.
What theory or theories might a court use to hold Wallace liable for insider trading? The equal access theory can be used to hold Wallace liable for insider trading. Definitely, his disclosure of said information to his uncle violates this theory 4. Under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, who would be required to certify the accuracy of financial statements filed with the SEC? The chief executive officer and the chief financial officer are required to certify the accuracy of these statements.
Katz v. US - Notes Does the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures require the police to obtain a search warrant in order to wiretap a public pay phone? KATZ v. UNITED STATES. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 06 April 2013. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1967/1967_35>.
Ethical Issues In Relation to Conrad Black Trial Table of Content Introduction 3 The Auditor's behaviour and The Five Fundamental Principles of APES 110 5 The role and ethical behaviour of Conrad Black and his associates in HII scandal. 8 The role and ethical behaviour of Mark Kipnsis 8 The role and ethical behaviour of the four executives 9 The important of the auditor to behave ethically 11 Bibliography 12 Introduction The principle allegation of the Conrad Black trial is that Mr Conrad Black, as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Hollinger International Inc. (HII), illegally took the money from the company through a series of related party transactions that were not approved by the HII's board of directors and that he failed to properly disclosed in the company report. According to APES 110 Code of Ethic for Professional Accountants, related parties are entities who have a special relationship prior to the involvement in business deal or arrangement [ (Part A General application of the code,., 2010) ]. The special relationship includes: * one entity has a direct/indirect control over another entity or * one entity has a direct financial interest and a significant influence over another party. The Corporation Act 2001, Section 228, states that an entity that is a related party of a public company at a particular time if the entity: * is a controlling entity * are directors and their spouses or * are relatives of directors and their spouses A related party transaction arises when there is a business deal or arrangement between the related parties.
The reason the FBI had jurisdiction is because cyber-harassment is a federal crime. And once the FBI got to Broadwell, they uncovered the affair. From there, Fox News has learned, the first knowledge of the affair outside the FBI came from an agency whistle-blower who contacted a Capitol Hill Republican, who then told House Majority Leader Eric Cantor. Rep. Dave Reichert, R-Wash., got a tip from a friend who knew the whistle-blower, as first reported by The New York Times. Sources tell Fox News that Reichert talked to the whistle-blower, then referred him to Cantor.
1. Why wasn't eBay held liable for the infringing sales made by users? (HINT: Describe how the elements of the Inwood test apply to eBay's actions). Tiffany claimed the contributory trademark infringement of eBay, which was a judicially constructed doctrine, articulated by the Supreme Court in Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc. and found the liability for trademark infringement can extend beyond those who actually mislabel goods with the mark of another. As established in Inwood, "if a manufacturer or distributor intentionally induces another to infringe a trademark, or if it continues to supply its product to one whom it knows or has reason to know is engaging in trademark infringement, the manufacturer or distributor is contributor ally responsible for any harm done as a result of the deceit” (2nd Cir.
In the landmark case, Gideon v. Wainwright (1964) which stated persons charged with a crime have the right to an attorney even if one cannot be afforded. The right to representation and speedy trial are critical to due process and limits government power to detain an individual indefinitely. This notion was challenged with the events of September 11th, 200l. Acts of terrorism have comprised civil liberties raising attention to how far the government can go investigating and prosecuting individuals. After the attacks Congress passed the U.S.A Patriot law to increase investigations on terrorist (Wilson, 2009).
A jury convicted Respondent. Statement and Discussion of the Legal Issues in Dispute: There are two issues regarding Section:10(b) and Section:14(e). The first issue is whether Respondent violated Section:10(b) and Rule 10b-5 when he misappropriated nonpublic information to personally benefit through the trading of securities. The second issue is whether Rule 14e-3(a) exceeds the SEC’s rule-making authority as granted by the Securities and Exchange Act. Subject Court Final Decision: Respondent did violate Section:10(b) and Rule 10b-5 because all of the element of the rule were met.