Recent Publication:
Stephen Miller and Max Kaplan discuss how the 21st Amendment took center stage recently at the U.S. Supreme Court. The justices considered whether the amendment provided an exception to the dormant commerce clause, which disfavors state interference in interstate commerce.
Clients facing government investigations depend on counsel with practical judgment and investigative expertise. As the co-chair of our White Collar Defense & Investigations practice group, Stephen marshals his experience in those areas to advise companies and individuals confronting potential criminal exposure.
He works with clients to conduct internal investigations, implement compliance solutions, and navigate government investigations. Stephen is highly skilled at helping clients avoid criminal charges and litigation in the first place, but if it cannot be avoided, he draws on his notable litigation experience to defend his clients’ reputations and interests. Stephen has particular experience in the areas of international anti-corruption laws, export controls, the False Claims Act, and matters relating to sports and gaming regulation.
Following two judicial clerkships, including one on the Supreme Court of the United States, Stephen served nine years as a federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices in the Southern District of New York and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. He handled wide-ranging international investigations as a prosecutor, conducting and supervising innovative investigations of violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and federal export regulations. Among other successes, Stephen investigated and prosecuted individuals who exported sensitive technology to Iran in violation of export controls, uncovered and prosecuted widespread fraud in the United Nations Oil-for-Food Program, and thwarted efforts by Hezbollah to obtain thousands of heat-seeking missiles and machine guns from sources inside the United States.
In addition to his unique investigative and trial experience, Stephen has exceptional abilities as an appellate lawyer. He has briefed and argued appeals before the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 2nd, 3rd, 7th, and Federal Circuits, and has also briefed matters in multiple state Supreme Courts and the Supreme Court of the United States.
News
July 13, 2018
Barry Boss, co-chair of the firm’s Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations Practice, and Stephen Miller, vice chair of the firm’s Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations Practice are featured in GamblingCompliance.
June 29, 2018
Stephen Miller, vice chair of Cozen O’Connor’s Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations Practice, is quoted Law 360 on the impact legalized sports betting has on the integrity of college sports.
January 25, 2018
Stephen A. Miller, vice chair of Cozen O’Connor’s Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations Practice Group, discusses the U.S. Department of Justice’s memo that is guiding its attorneys on when to seek dismissals of False Claims Act cases in Law360.
February 10, 2017
National Hockey League deputy commissioner Bill Daly came to Philadelphia on Thursday to be a keynote speaker at a sports business conference organized by local law firm Cozen O'Connor and Penn's Wharton business school.
June 03, 2016
Stephen Miller, vice chair of Cozen O'Connor's Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations practice, discusses the Bharara insider-trading crackdown on Bloomberg.com.
February 17, 2016
Stephen Miller, who clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in 1998 and 1999, discusses his time with the Justice and the influence he had as a judge.
October 29, 2015
The judges of the First Judicial Distrct of PA will present pro bono service awards to 17 Cozen O'Connor attorneys who have handled pro bono matters this year in FJD courts.
March 04, 2014
In an article titled “Former UNC African studies manager won't be charged, but will cooperate with probe,” Stephen Miller (Commercial Litigation, Philadelphia) discusses the recent investigation into UNC-Chapel Hill academics. Previous noncriminal investigations had found Deborah Crowder, a retired manager of the African and Afro-American studies department at UNC, was at the center of the creation of lecture-style classes frequented by athletes that never met and that typically provided high grades for those who turned in a term-paper at the end of the semester. But, on Tuesday, March 4, Orange County District Attorney Jim Woodall said that Crowder, who retired in 2009, would not be charged with any crime, but is expected to cooperate with a new investigation into the academic fraud, one that UNC leaders say will seek to find out how it happened and why.
November 05, 2013
In an article titled “SAC Agrees to Plead Guilty to End Insider Trading Case,” Stephen Miller, of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, discusses SAC Capital Advisors LP, the hedge fund accused of fostering a culture of rampant insider trading. SAC has recently agreed to plead guilty to securities fraud and wire fraud, pay a record $1.8 billion and shutter its investment advisory business.
October 08, 2013
In an article titled “Alabama case spotlights Emmert, Saban friendship,” Stephen Miller, of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, discusses NCAA enforcement actions as they relate to recent allegations about an Alabama football player accepting impermissible benefits while at the school. Miller states, “The NCAA has a major credibility problem when it comes to enforcement actions, and that's especially so under Mark Emmert because it seems Emmert picks and chooses when he wants to get involved."
October 05, 2013
In an article titled “Madoff Ex-Worker Trial to Shine New Light on Ponzi Scheme,” Stephen Miller, of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, discusses the criminal trial of Bernard Madoff’s ex-employees, which will investigate further into their alleged roles in carrying out the world’s biggest Ponzi scheme. Miller states, “People have always wondered what was known inside Madoff’s operation and this trial will be our first window into that world.”
June 18, 2013
In an article titled, "Anti-Corruption as a Cottage Industry: Rise in FCPA Enforcement Generates Heavy Workloads for Outside Counsel," Stephen Miller of the firm's Commercial Litigation Department discusses the benefits of using lawyers with experience in government when seeking counsel on FCPA-related matters.
May 22, 2013
In an article titled, “The impact and continuing evolution of the FCPA,” Stephen Miller, a member in the firm’s Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations practice, discusses the recent uptick in the enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the benefits of self-reporting any potential violations.
April 17, 2013
In Genesis Healthcare Corp v. Laura Symczyk, the Court ruled that the case against the nursing and rehabilitation provider should be dismissed because its offer to Symczyk of the unpaid wages to which she alleged she was entitled effectively ended her stake in the case. The 5-4 decision, split along the court's ideological fault lines, will likely have limited practical applicability but could spark further debate about whether the justices treat collective actions brought under the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) differently from traditional class actions.
December 19, 2012
In an article titled, “SAC Indictment Deadline May Show U.S. Hand on Cohen Deal,” Stephen Miller, a former federal prosecutor, discussed the government’s approach to securing an indictment against a former SAC Capital Advisors LP portfolio manager accused of insider trading.
December 03, 2012
Genesis Healthcare Corporation urged the U.S. Supreme Court to refuse to allow wage-and-hour collective actions to proceed after the named plaintiff has been offered full relief, contending that such an offer moots the case.
June 30, 2012
Stephen Miller, a member in Cozen O’Connor’s Criminal Defense and Government Investigations Group, discussed the frustration of Bernard Madoff’s victims regarding the lack of information about the workings of the decades-long Ponzi scheme in an article titled, ''Peter Madoff Admts Aiding Brother’s Ponzi Scheme.''
September 21, 2011
Stephen Miller was quoted in Bloomberg Businessweek regarding the sentencing of Zvi Goffer, the former Galleon trader, and Winifred Jiau, a consultant for Primary Global Research LLC, who were convicted in June in separate trials in federal court in Manhattan as part of a U.S. crackdown on insider trading. Stephen commented, ''The U.S. attorney is going to keep this case in the public eye for a week. That should create the desired deterrent effect.''
May 12, 2011
Stephen Miller, a member in the Criminal Defense and Government Investigations Practice Group, was quoted by multiple news agencies, including the Associated Press, Bloomberg News, and Reuters. Mr. Miller commented on recent insider-trading cases involving Raj Rajaratnam and three traders. Mr. Miller describes how wire tapping was used in the case and how it has been effective.
March 02, 2011
Stephen Miller, a member in the Criminal Defense and Government Investigations Practice Group, was quoted in a Bloomberg News article. The article addressed Danielle Chiesi, former consultant for New Castle Funds LLC, pleading guilty to conspiracy to commit securities fraud charges. Mr. Miller commented on how this affects accused co-conspirator Raj Rajaratnam, noting, ''The plea is bad for Rajaratnam any way you look at it. If she's cooperating, that’s really bad for him. If not, the plea allows the government to focus all its guns [on Rajaratnam].''
February 24, 2011
Stephen A. Miller, member in the firm's Commercial Litigation Practice Group, discussed the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Dow Jones Newswires article ''2nd Update: US Supreme Court Clears Way for Seat Belt Lawsuits.'' The article addresses the recent decision in Williamson v. Mazda Motor of America that federal vehicle safety regulations do not protect car manufacturers from lawsuits involving lap-only seat belts. Stephen is quoted as saying, ''the ruling demonstrates why it is too simplistic to think of the Roberts Court as always pro-business.''
September 27, 2010
Cozen O’Connor Adds Former Assistant U.S. Attorney, Supreme Court Clerk Stephen A. Miller
Publications
March 06, 2019
Stephen Miller and Max Kaplan discuss how the 21st Amendment took center stage recently at the U.S. Supreme Court. The justices considered whether the amendment provided an exception to the dormant commerce clause, which disfavors state interference in interstate commerce.
February 06, 2019
Stephen Miller and Chase Howard authored an article in The Legal Intelligencer on the Supreme Court’s upcoming decision regarding whether a state can be brought into another state’s courts without its consent.
December 05, 2018
In AmLaw Litigation Daily, Stephen Miller and Rachel Collins Clarke discuss the fact that the US Supreme Court is considering whether the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment bars the execution of an inmate who no longer remembers his own name, much less committing the capital crime of conviction.
November 08, 2018
Stephen Miller, Vice Chair of the firm's White Collar Defense & Investigations Practice, and Leigh Ann Benson, an associate in the firm's Commercial Litigation Department, co-authored, "US Supreme Court Considers Asbestos Actions Under Maritime Law" for The Legal Intelligencer.
October 05, 2018
A quarterly newsletter reviewing Third Circuit opinions impacting white collar criminal lawyers.
July 09, 2018
A quarterly newsletter reviewing Third Circuit opinions impacting white collar criminal lawyers.
May 07, 2018
Stephen Miller, vice chair of the firm's Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations Practice Group and Isaac Binkovitz, an associate in the firm's Commercial Litigation Department, co-authored, "US Supreme Court Considers Appropriate Deference to Foreign Law," for The Legal Intelligencer.
April 13, 2018
Stephen Miller, vice chair of Cozen O'Connor's Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations Practice Group, and Pamela Dorian, an associate in the firm's Commercial Litigation Department, co-authored, in The Legal Intelligencer "Supreme Court Considers State Ban on Political Apparel in Polling Place."
April 12, 2018
A quarterly newsletter reviewing Third Circuit opinions impacting white collar criminal lawyers.
April 03, 2018
Stephen Miller, vice chair of Cozen O'Connor's Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations Practice Group, and Pamela Dorian, an associate in the firm's Commercial Litigation Department, co-authored, in The Legal Intelligencer "Is a Warrant Necessary to Search a Vehicle Parked Near a Person's Home?"
February 07, 2018
Stephen Miller and Rachel Collins Clarke, members of Cozen O'Connor's Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations Practice, co-authored in The Legal Intelligencer, “Supreme Court Tackles Fourth Amendment Case Involving Cellphone Privacy."
January 11, 2018
Stephen Miller, vice chair of Cozen O'Connor's Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations Practice, and Leigh Ann Benson, associate in the firm's Commercial Litigation Department, co-authored, in The Legal Intelligencer "Masterpiece Cakeshop v. CCR: A Difficult Balance for Justices."
December 04, 2017
Stephen A. Miller, vice chair of the firm's Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations Practice Group, and Haryle Kaldis, an associate in the firm's Commercial Litigation Department, co-authored for The Legal Intelligencer, "Supreme Court Examines Intersection of Class Waivers and Employees’ Rights".
November 09, 2017
Stephen A. Miller, vice chair of Cozen O'Connor's Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations practice, and Leigh Ann Benson, associate in the firm's Commercial Litigation department, co-authored in Yahoo!, "NJ's Supreme Court Gamble: Garden State Takes on PASPA."
October 10, 2017
Stephen Miller, vice chair of Cozen O'Connor's Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations practice, and William Lesser, an associate in the firm's Commercial Litigation department, co-authored for The Legal Intelligencer, "US Supreme Court Confronts Partisan Gerrymandering."
June 09, 2017
Jeffrey Monhait and Stephen Miller discuss the new collective bargaining agreement between the NBA and the NBA Players Association and review the disciplinary powers of both the teams and the league in their Law360 article, "Navigating NBA's New CBA During Misconduct Investigations."
May 04, 2017
Stephen Miller, vice chair of Cozen O'Connor's Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations practice, and William Lesser, of the Commercial Litigation department, discuss internet restrictions on registered sex offenders in The Legal Intelligencer.
April 04, 2017
Stephen Miller and Matthew Coin, both of Cozen O'Connor's Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations practice, discuss the U.S. Supreme Court in The Legal Intelligencer.
January 11, 2017
Stephen A. Miller and Kathryn Young Galla discuss a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court is grappling with the issue of racial bias in the decision-making of a criminal trial jury.
November 09, 2016
Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O'Connor's Criminal Defense and Internal Investigations practice, and Nicholas Karwacki, of Cozen O'Connor's Commercial Litigation department, discuss insider trading in The Legal Intelligencer.
March 10, 2016
Stephen Miller and Nicholas Karwacki discuss the scope of the First Amendment protection of public employees in the Legal Intelligencer.
January 30, 2016
Stephen Miller and Stephen Kempa co-wrote this article discussing the extraterritorial application of U.S. law in the contect of RICO, which U.S. Supreme Court will return to this term.
January 11, 2016
Stephen Miller, vice chair of the firm's Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations Practice Group, and Pamela Dorian, an associate in the firm's Commercial Litigation Practice, co-authored, "US Supreme Court Addresses 'Attenuating' Circumstances."
November 20, 2015
Stephen Miller and Nicholas Karwacki discuss the US Supreme Court revisiting class-action suits in 'Campbell Ewald'
November 12, 2015
Stephen Miller and Leigh Ann Benson discuss Spokeo v. Robins, an appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit raising the question whether Congress may create an “injury-in-fact” simply from the violation of a federal statute.
October 08, 2015
Stephen Miller discusses some of the cases that will occupy the Supreme Court justices’ attention for the next few months.
August 03, 2015
Barry Boss, Stephen Miller, and Rebecca Brodey discuss the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division’s latest investigation – airline capacity restrictions.
June 10, 2015
Stephen Miller and Arthur Fritzinger discuss Obergefell v. Hodges, which the Supreme Court will decide later this month.
May 14, 2015
Stephen Miller and Diana Lin discuss the Supreme Court’s examination of a facial Fourth Amendment challenge to Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 41.49, which authorized law enforcement officers to routinely inspect hotel guest registers without exigent circumstances, probable cause, or judicial supervision.
April 09, 2015
In an article titled “US Supreme Court Considers Religious Accommodations,” Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, discusses an important case regarding employers' obligations to accommodate employees' religious practices under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Must the employer have actual knowledge that the applicant or employee requires a religious accommodation, or does a hunch suffice? And must that knowledge come from direct, explicit notice from the applicant or employee, or can it come from some other source? The justices will try to answer these questions in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores.
March 12, 2015
In an article titled “US Supreme Court Confronts Testimony in Child Abuse Cases,” Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, and Kathryn Young, an associate in the Commercial Litigation Department, discuss how child abuse cases are difficult to prosecute because there are often few witnesses and those witnesses are often very young. The question whether those young witnesses must testify about their abuse in court, therefore, has great practical and constitutional importance.
February 12, 2015
In an article titled ''Justices Eye Hierarchy of Protected Speech in Street Sign Case,'' Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, and Leigh Ann Benson, an associate in the Commercial Litigation Department, discuss Reed v. Town of Gilbert, in which the U.S. Supreme Court has an opportunity to overhaul its First Amendment jurisprudence. The Town of Gilbert's sign ordinance was challenged by Good News Community Church and its pastor, Clyde Reed. Good News is a relatively small congregation in Gilbert that meets weekly for fellowship and worship. The church views its signs as ideological while the town considers them to be directional – a distinction that has significant practical effects. Although it seems likely Gilbert's ordinance will be struck down, the more interesting question is whether five Justices will unite around a far-reaching opinion that revamps the court's First Amendment jurisprudence.
January 15, 2015
In an article titled “U.S. Supreme Court Analyzes Pregnancy Discrimination,” Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, and Jessica Hurst, an associate in the Labor & Employment Department, discuss Young v. United Parcel Services, in which the U.S. Supreme Court will decide the appropriate standard to apply in determining whether an employer has violated the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. More specifically, the court will determine under what circumstances pregnant employees are entitled to work accommodations that are provided to their non-pregnant coworkers.
December 29, 2014
In an article titled “Social Media Posts Take Center Stage at U.S. Supreme Court,” Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, and Alexa Sebia, an associate in the Commercial Litigation Department, discuss United States v. Elonis, in which the U.S. Supreme Court will attempt to define when comments made on social media platforms cross the line from protected free speech to criminal activity. The case arose in our own Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Anthony Elonis posted violent rap lyrics and graphic messages on Facebook about his estranged wife, co-workers and an FBI agent. The communications were objectively threatening, but the relevant question is whether that speech is protected if the government cannot prove that the speaker intended to act on the threat.
December 04, 2014
In an article titled “U.S. Supreme Court to Consider Federal Procedure Questions,” Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, and Stephen Kempa, an associate in the Commercial Litigation Department, discuss several U.S. Supreme Court cases dealing with important issues in the area of federal practice and procedure.
November 09, 2014
In an article titled “Supreme Court Takes on Knowledge Standard in Securities Suits,” Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, and Kaitlin DiNapoli, an associate in the Commercial Litigation Department, discuss Omnicare v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund, in which shareholders invoked the securities laws to sue Omnicare for proclaiming in its U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission registration statement that its contracts with drug companies were lawful. This term, the U.S. Supreme Court will explore the pleading standard necessary to proceed on such a securities claim: May the plaintiffs merely allege that such a statement was objectively wrong, or must the plaintiffs also allege that the speaker did not believe that the statement was true?
November 06, 2014
In an article titled “Supreme Court Addresses Treatment of Incriminating Evidence,” Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, and Michael O’Donnell, an associate in the Commercial Litigation Department, discuss two cases that the U.S. Supreme Court will decide in the coming months relating to incriminating evidence – one concerns finding it, and the other concerns destroying it.
October 02, 2014
In an article titled ''U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Standards for Restitution Orders,'' Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, and Kaitlin DiNapoli, an associate in the Commercial Litigation Department, discuss Paroline v. United States, in which the Court crafted a new causation standard for awards of restitution following federal criminal convictions.
September 04, 2014
In an article titled ''Preview of the U.S. Supreme Court’s October Term in 2014,'' Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation Department, discusses some of the highlights of the U.S. Supreme Court's docket for the upcoming term.
August 15, 2014
In an article published in Today's General Counsel, Stephen Miller, a member of the Commercial Litigation Department, and Brian Kint, an associate in the Commercial Litigation Department, discuss the dispute involving the privileged status of documents created during internal code of business conduct (COBC) investigations conducted by Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc. The case serves as a reminder that reasonable jurists can evaluate privilege issues differently and gives examples of how companies can strengthen any assertion of privilege over internal investigation materials.
July 03, 2014
In an article published in The Legal Intelligencer, Stephen Miller and Kaitlin DiNapoli, attorneys in Cozen O’Connor’s Litigation Department, discuss the U.S. Supreme Court’s exploration of two Fair Labor Standards Act cases that have far-reaching consequences for employers, since back pay, overtime and double damages for employees are on the line. The cases involve the compensability of certain activities—donning and doffing protective gear in the case decided in January and going through a security screen in the new case—that employees must complete to perform their jobs, but are not necessarily the crux of the jobs themselves.
June 05, 2014
In an article published in The Legal Intelligencer, Stephen Miller and Jordan Fox, members of Cozen O'Connor's Commercial Litigation Department, discuss the U.S. Supreme Court's focus on the First Amendment this term. The court heard oral arguments in April in two such cases—one concerning the protections afforded a public employee while testifying under subpoena, and one concerning the ability of individuals to challenge speech-restrictive campaign laws. Both of these cases present the court with the difficult task of applying longstanding doctrine to new and perplexing problems.
May 01, 2014
In an article published in The Legal Intelligencer, Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O’Connor’s Commercial Litigation and Criminal Defense & Internal Investigations Departments, and Kristy Miller, an associate in the firm’s Litigation Department, discuss the difficult task of reconciling traditional notions of privacy with evolving species of technology as it relates to two recent cases that address what level of privacy one can expect in data stored on a cellphone.
April 03, 2014
In an article titled “U.S. Supreme Court Tackles Questions of Criminal Intent,” Stephen Miller and Jordan Fox, members of Cozen O'Connor's Commercial Litigation Department, discuss the element of criminal intent. “Guilty knowledge” is often the hardest element for the government to prove in a criminal prosecution. For that reason, criminal practitioners pay special attention to changes in the law that impacts the evidence admissible on the score. The U.S. Supreme Court decided one such case during this term and was set to hear oral argument in another this week.
March 06, 2014
In an article titled "Private Enforcement of Product Labeling Violations," Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O'Connor's Commercial Litigation Department, and David Albert, a member of Cozen O'Connor's Intellectual Property Department, discuss the U.S. Supreme Court's consideration in April whether a private litigant can sue a company for violating federal restrictions on labeling food and beverage products.
February 27, 2014
In an article titled "Copyright Act's Application to Internet Television Broadcasts," Stephen Miller, a member of Cozen O'Connor's Commercial Litigation Department, and Thomas Leonard, an associate in the firm's Litigation Department, discuss the U.S. Supreme Court's upcoming decision on whether Aereo's system of transmitting television programs over the Internet violates the Copyright Act. The ruling could have a seismic impact on the television industry and how Americans view television shows.
February 06, 2014
In two sets of cases this term, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to decide questions that could significantly alter securities litigation on behalf of large groups of investors under both federal and state law.
January 22, 2014
OFAC does not deal only with cooperating entities, of course. On one hand, non-cooperating entities certainly run a risk that OFAC will refer their violations to criminal authorities. But even a non-cooperator can receive benefits, even grudgingly, under OFAC’s administrative-penalty regime — especially compared to companies that become targets of criminal prosecution and the severe penalties attendant to that process. That comparison between administrative and criminal punishments of non-cooperating entities, as discussed infra, may yield useful, persuasive data to criminal defense lawyers representing an entity under criminal investigation.
January 02, 2014
In two cases this term, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide the extent to which federal courts should defer to the decisions of other tribunals. Its decisions will have a substantial effect on the role of the federal courts in relation to state proceedings and in reviewing the decisions of international arbitration panels.
December 23, 2013
As the formulas from Part 1 demonstrate, OFAC’s regulations strongly incentivize cooperation to reduce a violator’s penalty. The next section examines a few recent enforcement actions in which companies have taken advantage of these regulatory formulas to minimize penalties resulting from violations.
December 12, 2013
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is rarely subtle when angry. And he has often been angry when evaluating the tests employed by his colleagues to resolve First Amendment religion cases. In particular, in a 1992 concurring opinion, he derided a multifactor test for evaluating the proper separation of religion and state as "some ghoul in a late-night horror movie that repeatedly sits up in its grave and shuffles abroad after being repeatedly killed and buried … frightening the little children and school attorneys" across the country.
November 20, 2013
Recent settlements in civil enforcement proceedings brought by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) suggest that cover-ups, not crimes, may invite the stiffest penalties. Frequently, companies that cooperate with OFAC investigations, admit wrongdoing and take remedial actions to prevent future violations escape the enforcement process with mild punishments. Indeed, even companies that eventually cooperate after some initial resistance fare well in OFAC’s administrative enforcement process and often avoid criminal penalties altogether — penalties that, aside from the reputational damage, carry much more severe consequences, including prison time for individuals and massive financial impact.
November 14, 2013
The jurisdiction cases reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court are rarely headline-grabbing. Nonetheless, those cases exert a significant effect on the civil litigation that fills the nation's dockets. This fall, the justices are considering two interesting cases from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that may limit the ability of federal courts to exercise jurisdiction over parties in foreign districts.
October 10, 2013
This term, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to decide three cases posing difficult questions about the limits of the powers of each of the three branches of the federal government.
October 03, 2013
After last term’s fireworks, casual observers of the U.S. Supreme Court may find it hard to believe that there remains anything left for the Supreme Court to decide. Somehow, though, the justices will find a few things to fill their days. And a preview of the cases slated for review (so far) reveals that those “things” promise to be very interesting.
September 25, 2013
What could be better than new love, except perhaps secret new love? Few in the throes of budding romance are willing to acknowledge the possibility that what is sweet now might sour later, let alone eventuate in a lawsuit. But when the romance in question is between co-workers, and especially where there is a supervisory relationship involved, the company hosting their courtship should take protective measures once the relationship comes to light. Otherwise, what began as an innocent (or not-so-innocent) dalliance could end in a nasty and costly lawsuit.
June 13, 2013
The U.S. Supreme Court is presently considering whether federal law pre-empts state design-defect claims targeting generic pharmaceutical products. Just two years ago, the court insulated generic-drug manufacturers from state-law failure-to-warn claims. It seems doubtful that any of the justices in that majority will treat this case differently, and, thus, generic drugmakers may soon enjoy a new immunity.
May 09, 2013
At oral argument in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, the U.S. Supreme Court recently grappled with the question of whether human genes are patentable. Justice Stephen Breyer seemed to capture the justices' sentiment in the lively argument session: "The patent law is filled with uneasy compromises." The compromises that the justices choose will affect the future work of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) and shape the path of genetic research in the future.
April 24, 2013
Most of the federal government's authority is exercised, on a day-to-day basis, through its administrative agencies. Central to the efficiency of those agencies — such as it is — is the judiciary's substantial deference to agency decision-making. Without that deference, people and corporations would often have an incentive to try to impair (or at least delay) agencies' actions through court challenges.
March 14, 2013
Congress funds a variety of causes to the exclusion of others. That is permissible and necessary. Congress cannot, however, condition its spending on the abandonment of recipients' constitutional rights.
February 07, 2013
The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari this term on two issues concerning the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause. The justices heard oral arguments January 15 on a case focused on the conditions that a land-use agency may attach when issuing a development permit.
January 10, 2013
In the most recent Supreme Court term, justices heard oral arguments and granted certiorari on several cutting-edge questions of intellectual property law.
December 19, 2012
The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard arguments in a number of interesting Fourth Amendment cases. Of particular interest is a case questioning police use of drug-sniffing dogs to detect contraband in a defendant's home, and another case questioning whether police may detain an individual who has left a premises about to be searched pursuant to a valid warrant.
November 27, 2012
In Jesse Jackson's famous Saturday Night Live sketch, every question was moot. Luckily for litigants, our courts take a more forgiving view. This term, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider questions relating to justiciability in a diverse array of cases touching upon national security, trademark law, the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Hague Convention. Each case turns on whether there is a "case" or "controversy," as required by Article III of the Constitution.
October 29, 2012
The NCAA is a financial juggernaut. Each year, the organization generates nearly a billion dollars of revenue premised largely on its perceived status as shepherd of the amateur ideal. Indeed, the NCAA takes great pains to cultivate that image by, among other things, reminding us that most student-athletes “go pro in something other than sports.”
October 23, 2012
A lawyer's take on how to fix the National College Athletics Association's broken, capricious system for investigating and punishing schools and student-athletes accused of impropriety
October 23, 2012
Two terms ago, in Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes, a 5-4 majority of the U.S. Supreme Court emphasized that class actions should be the "exception," not the rule, in federal litigation. In Dukes, the court held that a class of 1.5 million current and former employees of Wal-Mart failed to satisfy the "commonality" requirement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, and, therefore, could not bring a class action asserting their employment discrimination claims under Title VII.
September 26, 2012
Preview of the U.S. Supreme Court's Upcoming Term - The Legal Intelligencer - The Supreme Court will continue its recent trend of answering important questions in intellectual property litigation.
April 16, 2012
In the 2000 World/Subway Series, Roger Clemens hurled a broken bat at Mike Piazza. In hindsight, we can ask: Was it “roid rage”?
Clemens now finds himself on trial this week in a real Washington D.C. courtroom concerning his use of performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs).
March 20, 2012
Justices Set to Revisit Affirmative Action for Universities - The Legal Intelligencer -
January 24, 2012
The 'Eyes' Have It at the U.S. Supreme Court - The Legal Intelligencer -
October 19, 2011
Blockbusters Loom as Supreme Court Term Begins - The Legal Intelligencer - It is surely tempting to summarize the Supreme Court's upcoming term in the voice of Charlie Brown's teacher: " Wah wah, wah wah wah wah , health care, wah wah wah wah , health care." The court's anticipated consideration of challenges to the Affordable Care Act would be momentous in any term; it becomes especially important when it occurs in the midst of the next presidential election.
October 01, 2011
Fall 2011 - Business Law Observer - We welcome your inquiries on these topics and any other questions you may have, and trust that we can provide you with the counsel you need to steer clear of the impediments to successfully running your business.
September 12, 2011
PA Firms Making Midlevels Happier - The Legal Intelligencer - The bulk of Pennsylvania firms did a better job keeping their midlevel associates happy this year than they did last year, according to a survey by Legal affiliate The American Lawyer.
July 11, 2011
Standard of Review in Coverage Disputes Over Policies Governed by ERISA May Be Headed to Supreme Court - Insurance Coverage Alert! - Earlier this month, the 3rd Circuit took the minority side on an issue affecting life and health insurers that appears headed for the Supreme Court. In Viera v. Life Insurance Company of North America (June 10, 2011), the court held that an insurance company did not adequately communicate to policyholders that it retained broad-ranging authority to assess compliance under a group accidental death and dismemberment policy governed by ERISA.
June 21, 2011
Securities Plaintiffs Win Two Out of Three at Supreme Court - The Legal Intelligencer - The U.S. Supreme Court issued three decisions in securities fraud cases this term. Plaintiffs' lawyers scored
victories in the first two cases.
June 13, 2011
Supreme Court Decision Limits Scope of Private Securities-Fraud Actions - Securities Offerings and Regulation Alert! - This morning, the Supreme Court issued an important decision limiting the scope of private securities-fraud actions. The decision in Janus Capital Group, Inc., et al. v. First Derivative Traders (No. 09-525) will provide powerful protection to third-parties who assist issuers in the preparation of prospectuses and other public statements.
May 24, 2011
Global-Warming Litigation Gets Frosty Reception at the Supreme Court - The Legal Intelligencer - It is often difficult to predict the outcome of Supreme Court cases. This is not because the individual justices are particularly fickle or inscrutable. The reason is quite simple: The cases that make it all the way to the Supreme Court are hard. The court does not usually intervene in a dispute unless at least two lower courts, each composed of smart jurists, answered the same legal question differently.
May 10, 2011
A 'CSI effect' for wiretapping? - The National Law Journal - The impact of the insider-trading prosecution of Raj Rajaratnam will be seismic. The verdict is significant, to be sure, but the prosecutors' method of assembling the evidence in the case will be the most lasting legacy — in particular, the use of wiretaps to prove criminal intent with devastating clarity.
April 19, 2011
Confronting Changes in Confrontation Clause Jurisprudence - The Legal Intelligencer - It is a little-known fact that statues of turtles rest at the bottom of several lampposts in the Supreme Court building. Architect Cass Gilbert's design of the building reportedly featured the turtle prominently because it symbolized the slow, deliberate pace of justice to be rendered by the court. For the most part, the analogy has held true.
March 21, 2011
Justices Poised to Clarify Standards of Proof in Intellectual Property Cases - The Legal Intelligencer - In the coming year, the Supreme Court is poised to overhaul the standards of proof in important areas of IP litigation. This may both hearten and frustrate longtime IP practitioners. At a very basic level, the attention is nice. Then again, it's worth remembering that IP is a sufficiently complicated field as to warrant its own, dedicated
appellate court (the Federal Circuit). When the nine justices consider an IP issue, they do so as novices in that specialized domain,
February 14, 2011
‘Bad Vehicles’ Could Cause Crash in Class Actions - The Legal Intelligencer - In U.S. Supreme Court parlance, a "bad vehicle" is a case whose factual or procedural posture exerts an adverse influence on the legal rule that the justices announce and apply. As we all know, the court does not issue legal rulings sua sponte. Rather, it can only decide specific cases selected from the pool of petitions seeking review at any given time.
January 10, 2011
U.S. Supreme Court Likely to Continue Robust Free Speech Protection - The Legal Intelligencer - Each year, the Supreme Court considers several cases testing the contours of the First Amendment's protection of speech. The justices' enthusiasm for these cases should not be surprising. The free speech guarantee is a core element of our country's founding spirit and calls to protect dissident voices appeal to our visceral aversion to tyranny. In addition to those lofty principles, the underlying facts of
November 29, 2010
Three Supreme Court Cases to Test “Presumption Against Preemption” - The Legal Intelligencer - The Supreme Court has recognized several species of preemption, though the
categories tend to overlap. “Express” preemption occurs when Congress precludes state
regulation in a particular area by announcing such an intention in the text of a statute.