Diana Lloyd and Kevin Ma on Obstructing an Investigation

White Collar Law360

 | October 2, 2014

 | Diana Lloyd and Kevin Ma

View “High Court To Go Fishing For Answers In Anti-Shredding Case”

 

Diana Lloyd and Kevin Ma wrote “High Court To Go Fishing For Answers In Anti-Shredding Case” in White Collar Law360 where they discuss the Yates v. United States case and its testing the limits of 18 USC § 1519, the Sarbanes-Oxley provision that imposes criminal liability on anyone who “knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object” with the intent to impede or obstruct an investigation.  This also appeared in the Securities, Food & Beverage, Appellate and Florida sections of Law360

 

Thank you for reaching out to contact Choate. Before you send your message, we wanted to make sure you are aware of the following. Please do not send any confidential information in response to this link. Sending an e-mail to Choate does not give rise to an attorney-client relationship, and will not be deemed to disqualify Choate from undertaking any engagement for a current or future client.  Before any attorney-client engagement may be formed, Choate will need to check for possible conflicts of interest, you will need to consider whether you wish to retain Choate as counsel, and we will need to consider whether we wish to accept the potential engagement. In the meantime, Choate reserves the right to represent parties with interests adverse to you.

AcceptDecline