Expert Analysis

• Unpacking The New Russia Sanctions And Export Controls

  

  Although geographically broad new prohibitions the U.S., U.K. and EU issued last week are somewhat underwhelming in their efforts to target third-country facilitators of Russia sanctions evasion, companies with exposure to noncompliant jurisdictions should pay close attention to their potential impacts, say attorneys at Shearman.

• Mitigating Whistleblower Risks After High Court UBS Ruling

  

  While it is always good practice for companies to periodically review whistleblower trainings, policies and procedures, the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent whistleblower-friendly ruling in Murray v. UBS Securities helps demonstrate their importance in reducing litigation risk, say attorneys at Arnold & Porter.

• Perspectives

  Justices' Double Jeopardy Ruling Preserves Acquittal Sanctity

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous decision last week in McElrath v. Georgia, barring the state from retrying a man acquitted of murder after a so-called repugnant verdict, is significant in the tangled web of double jeopardy jurisprudence for its brief and unequivocal protection of an acquittal’s finality, says Lissa Griffin at Pace Law School.

• Steps For Companies New To Sanctions Compliance

  

  Businesses newly required to implement compliance programs due to the increased breadth of mandatory sanctions and export controls, including 500 additional Russia sanctions announced last Friday, should closely follow the guidance issued by the Office of Foreign Assets Control and other regulators, say Jennifer Schubert and Megan Church at MoloLamken.

• Bank Secrecy Act Lessons For Casinos After DOJ Settlements

  

  The U.S. Department of Justice's recent settlements with the MGM Grand and Cosmopolitan casinos, resolving an investigation into alleged violations of the Bank Secrecy Act, signal a shift in the DOJ's enforcement focus and provide insight into potential pitfalls in anti-money laundering compliance programs, say attorneys at Jenner & Block.

• High Court Forfeiture Case Again Pits Text Against Purpose

  

  In oral arguments Tuesday in McIntosh v. U.S., the U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether a federal court can impose asset forfeiture on a defendant even if it doesn’t comply with timing rules, which may affect the broader interpretation of procedural deadlines — and tees up the latest battle between textualism and purposivism, say Anden Chow and Christian Bale at MoloLamken.

• 6 Pointers For Attys To Build Trust, Credibility On Social Media

  

  In an era of information overload, attorneys can use social media strategically — from making infographics to leveraging targeted advertising — to cut through the noise and establish a reputation among current and potential clients, says Marly Broudie at SocialEyes Communications.

• Cos. Must Know How NY, Federal LLC Disclosure Laws Differ

  

  Though New York state's new LLC Transparency Act and the federal Corporate Transparency Act impose similar beneficial owner reporting obligations on limited liability companies, New York LLCs should study the important differences between the laws to ensure they are prepared to comply with both, say Abram Ellis, Olenka Burghardt and Jane Jho at Simpson Thacher.

• More Than Drugs At Stake In High Court's 'Blind Mule' Case

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's eventual decision in Diaz v. U.S., evaluating whether expert witnesses may testify that most defendants caught with drugs at the border know they are transporting drugs, could have implications for prosecuting everything from complex financial crimes to gun and drug cases, says Kenneth Notter at MoloLamken.

• A Refresher On Witness Testimony In 3 Key Settings

  

  The recent controversy over congressional testimony from university presidents about antisemitism on campus serves as a reminder to attorneys about what to emphasize and avoid when preparing witnesses to testify before Congress, and how this venue differs from grand jury and trial proceedings, say Jack Sharman and Tyler Yarbrough at Lightfoot Franklin.

• A Post-Mortem Analysis Of Stroock's Demise

  

  After the dissolution of 147-year-old firm Stroock late last year shook up the legal world, a post-mortem analysis of the data reveals a long list of warning signs preceding the firm’s collapse — and provides some insight into how other firms might avoid the same disastrous fate, says Craig Savitzky at Leopard Solutions.

• Preparing For DOJ's Data Analytics Push In FCPA Cases

  

  After the U.S. Department of Justice’s recent announcement that it will leverage data analytics in Foreign Corrupt Practice Act investigations and prosecutions, companies will need to develop a compliance strategy that likewise implements data analytics to get ahead of enforcement risks, say attorneys at Cozen O'Connor.

• Considering The Logical Extremes Of Your Legal Argument

  

  Recent oral arguments in the federal election interference case against former President Donald Trump highlighted the age-old technique of extending an argument to its logical limit — a principle that is still important for attorneys to consider in preparing their cases, says Reuben Guttman at Guttman Buschner.

• How High Court SEC Case Could Affect The ITC

  

  While the U.S. Supreme Court’s upcoming ruling in U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy will likely spare the U.S. International Trade Commission from major operative changes, the ITC’s ability to issue penalties for violations of its orders may change, say Gwendolyn Tawresey and Ryan Deck at Troutman Pepper.

• Storytelling Strategies To Defuse Courtroom Conspiracies

  

  Misinformation continues to proliferate in all sectors of society, including in the courtroom, as jurors try to fill in the gaps of incomplete trial narratives — underscoring the need for attorneys to tell a complete, consistent and credible story before and during trial, says David Metz at IMS Legal Strategies.